The archetypal approach categorical apparatus: socio-philosophical aspect

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15421/272019

Abstract

The article is devoted to the review of categories and concepts that form the methodological basis of the modern philosophical approach to socio-cultural phenomena – archetypal. Its value is postulated as a methodological tool for the analysis of social reality, the prospects of its use in socio-humanitarian science are emphasized. The focus is on the breadth of its methodological palette, which is due to the multidisciplinary potential of this approach. The nuances of terminological discourse, which unfold within the framework of developing the provisions of this approach in modern humanities in Ukraine and abroad, and not only in philosophical but also in socio-cultural science, are highlighted. The problem of classification of archetypes as a basic link of semantic construction of methodological approach is singled out. As the most articulated by researchers, the concept of «archetype» is singled out and analyzed; examples are given, which are used by researchers to assign this or that archetype to a certain category, the concept of «archetype» is compared with the categories through which the models of archetypal analysis are most often detailed. Among the categories with which the archetype is most often associated as a methodological construct, the concepts of «symbol», «myth», «image» («archetypal image»), «archetypal meaning», «idea», «concept» are emphasized. «Pattern». The content of some contradictory points in the array of archetypal analysis related to terminological uncertainty is revealed.

At the end, there is a review of issues in which the archetypal approach is fruitful, with special emphasis on social issues related to the analysis of activities and social practices. Criteria for proposing a clearer distinction between the concept of «archetype» and related categories of the archetypal approach are proposed. The importance of the archetype as a basis of social practice is emphasized, assumptions are made about the social nature of the psychological archetype with a potential access to social philosophy, and not to culturology or ethnopsychology. According to the author, this aspect of the archetypal approach requires further normalization, or attribution of «figurative» archetypes to images (then emphasizes the role of the symbol), and the categories of archetypes should include those though, components of the determination of human activity, which are still «closed» in spheres of anthropology and theory of culture, do not have an adequate access to the methodology of social philosophy – the essential forces of man: «spirit», «soul», «mind», «reason», «will», «body».

Published

2020-12-20