UDC 11/14:[378.091.3:004]

T. O. KOLESNYKOVA^1*, A. M. MALIVSKYI^2*

^1*Ukrainian State University of Science and Technologies (Dnipro, Ukraine), e-mail t.o.kolesnykova@ust.edu.ua, ORCID 0000-0002-4603-4375

Descartes on Open Knowledge and Human Perfection

Purpose. The purpose is to justify the validity of interpreting Descartes’ teachings as an enquiry into the search for forms and means of improving human nature, which implies a focus on the way he understands the openness of knowledge and education. The problem is considered from the perspective of representatives of university communities (teachers and librarians), historically included in the communication structure and system of the institution, including through the creation, management, use, preservation and dissemination of knowledge. Theoretical basis. One of the tenets of Descartes’ teachings is his desire to improve the human being. For our consideration, it is fundamentally important that Descartes uses "knowledge" not only in a narrow sense – as natural scientific knowledge, but also in a broader sense. In the context of the theme of the study, the most important case is when the thinker recalls the knowledge that every person experiences without referring to philosophy. It is this knowledge that, for Descartes, is key in resolving the central problem of his ethics – how can human nature be perfected? For our consideration of Descartes’ key points, it is fair to focus on the manifestation of the phenomenon of altruism in Descartes’ philosophy and on the representative fact of his inner openness – his willingness to engage in dialogue. He appreciates and encourages his interlocutors to turn to books, which are a form of representation of the vivid personalities of their authors. Originality. For the first time in the research literature, the thesis of René Descartes as one of the forerunners of the open knowledge system is substantiated. The arguments are given for the validity of Descartes’ interpretation of the demand of his own epoch for the search of effective forms of human improvement. Conclusions. The idea of justification of Descartes’ philosophical legacy as a predictor of open knowledge became possible under the condition of paying attention to the anthropological turn he made and finding substantive analogues of openness, including open education. Drawing on Christianity as the basis for altruism, Descartes demonstrates a caring attitude towards the achievements of previous generations on the path of personal self-development. His attention is rightly drawn to education and books as representations of vibrant personalities. Their authentic and productive assimilation is possible only under the condition of a caring attitude towards the public good, which involves the intellectual volunteering of teachers and librarians. It is about self-realization through altruistic self-improvement, i.e. intellectual charity, which is especially evident today during martial law in Ukraine and is voluntary, conscious and free work for the benefit of others.

Keywords: Descartes; open knowledge; open education; universities; university libraries; teachers; intellectual volunteering; improvement of human nature

"… my greatest desire is to communicate openly

and freely to everyone all the little I think I know"

(Descartes, 1996, АТ V: 327).

Introduction

Today, there is a radical change in the priorities of humanity, the manifestations of which include overcoming the naivety of worldviews. Intensive research into the outlines of the future is accompanied by a substantial rethinking of those generally accepted interpretations of the history of philosophical thought that are traditionally perceived as obsolete. It is axiomatic that the forward movement of human culture and education is impossible without a sceptical attitude to the achievements of previous eras and a radical renewal of the forms of dissemination of educational knowledge. Searches for forms of transition from egoism to altruism, from pragmatism to asceticism, etc., come to the fore. The concept of "Open Knowledge" belongs to the most representative forms that fix the specified shifts.

Open knowledge (or free knowledge) is knowledge that is free to use, reuse, and redistribute without legal, social, or technological restriction ("Open knowledge", 2022). Open knowledge is interpreted broadly, from creating open content to open practices.

In this context, we touch on the concept of "Open Education" – Open education is a philosophy about the way people should produce, share, and build on knowledge. Proponents of open education believe everyone in the world should have access to high-quality educational experiences and resources, and they work to eliminate barriers to this goal ("What is open education?", n.d.).

The concept of Open Knowledge, philosophy and practices of open education are intensively spreading around the world, changing for the better the negative situation with information support of education and science. For a long time, librarians of universities in different countries have been experiencing a heavy financial burden (which is increasing every year) in the acquisition of funds both with printed scientific journals and books, and those available online. Libraries are forced to refuse to purchase printed publications and access to electronic ones. This creates great barriers for researchers (scientists, teachers, students) to learn about new developments in their fields, or to read, replicate, and verify others’ findings. Often, researchers must relinquish the copyrights they hold on their work when they agree to let journals publish it. Journal publishers then charge individual readers and libraries fees for access to these scholarly materials. The financial pressure on students to have materials for studying sometimes prevents them from successfully completing the course. Therefore, it is the principles of open education through the open access movement that help university librarians to support their academic communities by providing access to the results of important research in times of crisis. This is an important prerequisite for progressive changes in higher education in Ukraine, especially against the background of the Covid 19 pandemic, the full-scale military invasion of russia in Ukraine and the defence of national identity by Ukrainians.

But in this process it is legitimate to question the adequacy of those assessments of the past that underpin this system of views. Today, in our opinion, one of the main problems of the French thinker René Descartes, namely understanding the nature of man and the motives of his behaviour, is acquiring a new meaning. When writing his works, Descartes was guided by educated contemporaries. He intended to contribute to the dissemination of his own knowledge as much as possible, regarding the ways and forms of the individual self-development and hoped that the best critics of his works would be educated people who received a thorough education and were able to think independently.

Therefore, the authors of this article consider the problem from the perspective of representatives of university communities (teachers and librarians), historically included in the communication structure and system of the institution, including through the creation, management, use, preservation and dissemination of knowledge.

Overview

The concept of Open Knowledge is not new, for the idea of the public domain, i.e. open access to knowledge, has existed since humanity first started to officially transmit and share ideas. Thus, one of the first printed texts of which we have record is a copy of the Buddhist Diamond Sutra, produced in China around 868AD. In it can be found the dedication: 'for universal free distribution' (Pollock, 2006).

For our consideration, it is important that when studying the predecessors of the system of open knowledge (including open education), it is customary to mention the significant influence of a number of famous European universities. The late Middle Ages (12th century onwards) in Europe were characterized by a series of changes that "opened up" education compared to what had previously been largely confined to monastic open schools.

The schools attached to monasteries gave rise to "studium generale" (generally educational) – the germ of universities, the general nature of which already recognized the importance and meant that it was "intended for entire Christendom without regard for national or territorial boundaries" (Riddle, 1993). "Studium generale" as the prototype of modern institutions of higher education already contained the idea of openness, although far from comprehensive. This period emphasizes "openness" as a student-centeredness based on growing curiosity and awareness of educational opportunities. Scholars from all over the continent gave lectures for free [for as long as knowledge was defined as a gift from God (Baldwin, 1971; Peter & Deimann, 2013)], and to a large extent there was an open curriculum, an earlier form of an international institution (Baldwin, 1971; Peter & Deimann, 2013).

The universities of Paris, Bologna, Oxford and Cambridge were formed thanks to students of the "studium generale".

However, this form of openness lasted for a relatively short time. By the late 1500s, access to knowledge and learning had changed dramatically. The institution of higher education became more and more closed; it was no longer a place for the free exchange of students, teachers, and ideas (Peter & Deimann, 2013).

It is generally accepted that the ideas about openness in education, in particular in higher education, belong to John Amos Comenius, who in the 1st half of the17th century proposed open access to education as a primary goal (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2020). Czech philosopher, educator, and theologian, a contemporary of Descartes, he introduced a number of educational concepts and innovations, including picture textbooks written in native languages instead of Latin. Educational Works of Comenius number more than forty titles. But in this case, it is no longer about openness in teaching, learning, exchange of ideas characteristic of "Studium generale".

European history in the sense of openness and exchange of knowledge also refers to the "Encyclopédie, ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers", where Denis Diderot was the chief editor and author of a notable number of articles. In the fourth volume of the Encyclopédie, Diderot allowed the reuse of his work in exchange for having materials from other authors. It is said: "Ce qui nous convient, nous le prenons partour où nous le trouvons; en revanche nous abondonnons notre travail à ceux qui voudront en disposer utilement" = "What suits us, we take wherever we find it; on the other hand, we give our work to those who want to use it usefully" (Schwab, Rex, & Lough, 1984, pp. 16-17).

Now, in the twenties of the 21st century, the spread of open knowledge is already evident at the global level, and the principles of openness are becoming the standard for individual higher education institutions and entire national education systems (Santos-Hermosa, Proudman, & Corti, 2022; U.S. PIRG, 2021).

However, today we cannot agree with the thesis that, before resuming in the 21st century, the trend of open education ends at the end of the 16th century, and in the 1st half of the 17th century is represented only by the ideas of John Amos Comenius. In our opinion, one of the preconditions for the nihilistic evaluation of its substantive analogues is insufficient attention to the current level of historical and philosophical science.

We intend to illustrate the veracity of this thesis on the example of the philosophical legacy of René Descartes.

Studying the question of why Descartes’ legacy has long been overlooked by the developers of the open knowledge system, it is worth paying attention to the following main factors: the reduced image of his teaching in the research literature, the manifestations of which include: a) exaggerated importance of the rational component; b) technomorphic reception of his legacy. Closely related to the latter point is the underestimation of the importance of the anthropological dimensions of philosophizing, the interpretation of reason as instrumental, and the neglect of the dialogic nature of the basic intention. Each of these shortcomings is undergoing an essential rethinking in the contemporary world. The revolution in Cartesianism and the powerful "Back to Descartes" movement open new perspectives. In the recent research literature, his doctrine of human being as true creation is coming to the forefront (Malivskyi, 2019). In our opinion, paying attention to this teaching opens up new opportunities for rethinking Descartes’ vision of education and scientific literature (books) as means of human perfection.

Above all, it is a question of comprehending the perspectives involved in the turn towards man as an open, i.e. incomplete creature. Currently, the nature of that open (dialogical) knowledge, which in Descartes’ philosophical legacy is a means of addressing the problem of radically changing the way humans behave, is still not sufficiently clarified.

Purpose

Therefore, the purpose of this article is to justify the validity of interpreting Descartes’ teachings as an enquiry into the search for forms and means of improving human nature, which implies a focus on the way he understands the openness of knowledge and education.

Statement of basic materials

Studying the history and state of open knowledge and open education, it is fair to focus at least schematically on the universal factors and features of altruism in European culture and Descartes works. The nature of social factors of altruism in modern times has already been sufficiently outlined by domestic researchers. Revealing their nature, Serhii Proleiev (2014, p. 148, p. 152) rightly focuses on the "social responsibility of capital". He emphasizes that: a) the very nature of capital is inherently subordinate to the public good, and b) argues with reason that "an inseparable component of the existence of significant capital in the Western world is charity – that is, the use of capital … for the public good. And so we can say", Proleiev continues, "that charity is even a civilised norm of capital’s existence". It is important for us that in the process of studying the deeper factors of the phenomenon of altruism (philanthropy), its rooting in the Christian religion is essential. This appeal makes it possible to comprehend "altruism as a factor of self-organization of human life and relations among people". Altruism and charity, paradoxical as it may sound, in a secularised society have become not so much a matter of private individuals as the social vocation of capital.

A related position is that of Robert Merton (1973) regarding one of the four standards of scientific ethos (CUDOS) – Disinterestedness (pp. 275-277). Disinterestedness, according to R. Merton, is when scientific institutions act for the benefit of a common scientific enterprise, rather than for the personal gain of individuals within them. Based on this, the primary motivation for a scientist’s activity is the disinterested search for truth.

In this context, it is appropriate to note that since the time of "Studium generale" as a prototype of modern institutions of higher education (which already contained the idea of openness), the most important motivating factor has been the spirit of intellectual philanthropy as the principle of existence and activity of the university. In our opinion, this spirit of intellectual philanthropy in today’s Ukraine, which heroically defends its independence and national identity in the war against Russian aggression, is embodied in various selfless actions of university teachers and librarians, who are included in the systems of creation, management, dissemination of open knowledge and open educational resources (Kolesnykova, 2021; Kolesnykova & Matveyeva, 2021). Bearing in mind the subordination of intellectual philanthropy to the public good, it is appropriate to mention that, as a way of improving itself, it is now, during the martial law in Ukraine, is enriched by the intellectual volunteering of teachers and librarians, as voluntary activity, conscious and free work for the benefit of others. As an example, we can refer to the experience of creating open textbooks (such as Open Educational Resources, OER) and their integration into international systems of open educational resources by teachers and librarians of the Ukrainian State University of Science and Technologies ("OERSI", 2022).

As for the particular manifestation of the phenomenon of altruism in Descartes’ philosophy, it is first and foremost fair to pay attention to the rootedness of his position in Christianity. Among the manifestations of this rootedness in his legacy is the meaningful connection between man and God. Stressing the priority for him personally of public interests over personal ones in a private letter to Princess Elisabeth dated September 15, 1645, Descartes emphasizes:

… the interests of the whole, of which each of us is a part, must always be preferred to those of our own particular person… if someone considers himself a part of the community, he delights in doing good to everyone, and does not hesitate even to risk his life in the service of others when the occasion demands. (Descartes, 1996, АТ IV: 293-294)

Below, he notes again the religious basis of altruism: "… abandoning himself altogether to God’s will, he strips himself of his own interests, and has no other passion than to do what he thinks pleasing to God" (Descartes, 1996, АТ IV: 294). In another (later) letter to the specified addressee, he uses a secularized form to state this motivation. In his deep conviction: "… as it is a nobler and more glorious thing to do good to others than to oneself, it is the noblest souls who have the greatest inclination thereto and who make least account of the goods they possess" on October 6, 1645 (Descartes, 1996, АТ IV: 317). A clear indication of the key importance of these beliefs to Descartes is a literal reproduction of them in the last year of his life (March 31, 1649) in a letter to his close friend, the French ambassador to Sweden, Chanut (quoted in the epigraph): "… my greatest desire is to communicate openly and freely to everyone all the little I think I know" (Descartes, 1996, АТ V: 327).

The attentive attitude of contemporary scholars to his legacy as a result of this intention leads them to an appreciation of the heuristic potential of this teaching. It can be qualified as a full-fledged participant in the current dialogue on the future fate of humanity: "Descartes remains one of our closest contemporaries" (Marion, 1999, р. 352).

As already mentioned, one of the central points of Descartes’ teaching is his desire to perfect a man. Its vivid representation is both the first title of "A Discourse on the Method" – "The Project of a Universal Science Which Can Bring Our Nature To the Highest Degree of Perfection" and the content of this text. A significant obstacle in the process of anthropological interpretation of the "Discourse" is established reductionist stereotypes. Since we are talking about an outstanding representative of the scientific revolution, who is at the same time a deep thinker, it seems a tempting thesis that the main means of this improvement is knowledge as natural and scientific knowledge.

A convincing manifestation of this line of thought is the position of Brissey (2013), who sees the absolutization of the cogito in Descartes’ philosophy and considers the idea of control to be the key point of his method (pр. 58-59). This author, as well as a number of others, succumb to the temptation of a simplified (literal) understanding of the concept of knowledge. However, modern research provides sufficient grounds for going beyond the technomorphic interpretation of the thinker. For our consideration, it is important to what extent the phenomenon of man falls into Descartes’ field of vision here. His practical philosophy is primarily related to the thinker’s intention to create himself in the process of self-education. In this context, the different level of involvement of human nature in this process is quite obvious. If in the case of technocratism, a person is taken into account fragmentarily, that is, only as a carrier of intelligence, then the sensual and passionate component of a person is perceived as an obstacle and eliminated. These ideas are easily consistent both with stereotypes about his lack of interest in people and moral problems, and with known forms of emphasizing the originality of his own point of view, in the form of a thesis about the difference between mind and body. However, although the fragmented reception of the legacy of the thinker is dominant in the literature, its premise is to ignore the achievements of the modern history of philosophy.

Analysing today the question of why there is a well-established tendency to reduce human nature in Descartes’ teachings to the reason, one must pay attention to his use of the image of a mask. Already in the pages of his early notes he proclaims his intention to conceal his beliefs through the notion of the mask. This intention remains valid for the thinker throughout the final phase of his work. On the pages of private letters and texts prepared for printing, he repeatedly admits that he did not always have the desire to emphasize the originality of his own position. Quite eloquent is his confession in a letter to Father Mesland of 2 May 1644, in which he notes the modesty of his own ambitions and the desire to present his ideas in an impersonal form: "I do not belong to the type of people who want their ideas to appear new; on the contrary, I align my views with the positions of others as far as the truth allows me" (authors’ transl.) (Descartes, 1996, АТ ІV: 113). Sometimes this aspiration takes surprising forms, when Descartes, known for his ambitions as a modern Aristotle, emphasizes the almost complete identity of his principles with the teachings of Aristotle in a letter to Father Charlet (Descartes, 1996, АТ ІV: 141). Revealing the motives for concealing the most radical aspects of his own position, he draws attention to leisure as a form of self-realization of man’s own vocation. In the last lines of the Discourse on the Method, Descartes emphasizes the unconditional priority of leisure for him over any, even the most honourable positions.

What is the type of knowledge that is the most important in the thinker’s work? For our consideration, it is of fundamental importance that Descartes uses the concept of "knowledge" not only in the narrow sense – as natural scientific knowledge – but also in a broader sense. Most important for our topic is the case when he mentions the knowledge that everyone experiences without resorting to philosophy. Their specificity lies in the fact that they are not verbalized and cannot be described in logical-conceptual form. It is this knowledge that, for Descartes, is key in the process of solving the main problem of his ethics – how can we improve human nature? When studying the specifics of this knowledge, it is worth paying attention to the following detail – in proclaiming his intention, he is not writing about the desire to share knowledge, but about the desire to show how he himself came to the truth, that is, he calls for the opportunity to be convinced by one’s own experience. It is worth noting that the concept of "experience" plays a central role here. The main means to achieve the goal (perfection of a person through experience) is the formation of a habit. Taking into account the prevalence of uncritical attitudes of people to their established habits, he notes the importance of significantly changing them (replacing them with others). When analysing the question of how this can be done, i.e. what pattern to follow, he draws attention to the well-known manifestations of the sublimity – mathematics and the idea of God. Accordingly, his intention is described as a) imitating the methodology of mathematics and b) proving the existence of God based on the human nature. Another form of formulation of the latter is the intention to promote a more adequate conception of God among human beings. A secular version of this ideal is the concept of generosity.

Having a thorough education at one of the best educational institutions of the time (in Descartes’ own words), he was well aware (from his own experience) of the importance of good textbooks. That is why it is appropriate to draw attention to his ambitious, although only partially realized, intention – to write a modern textbook, which would contain a critical exposition of the principles of scholastic philosophy (which was taught in educational institutions of that time). And since this idea was partially implemented, the consequence is a widespread fragmentary reception of his legacy. In particular, it is about the interpretation of the content of his "Principles of Philosophy" of 1644 as being reducible to the doctrine of inanimate nature. A prerequisite for his authentic reception is therefore an acquaintance with a letter to the French translator of this work of 1647, which is printed as a Preface. In the text of the latter, the author emphasizes the key importance of the unwritten fifth and sixth parts, devoted to the nature of animals and man (Descartes, 1996, AT IXB, pp. 1-20).

Another significant obstacle on this path is the above-mentioned notion of the monologic nature of his basic intention. For our consideration of Descartes’ key positions, it is appropriate to pay attention to the representative fact of his inner openness – readiness for dialogue. Among the striking manifestations of this dialogicality is above all his little-known work entitled "The Search for Truth by Natural Light". Studying the dialogic form of other works written by Descartes (above all the "Meditations"), it should be noted that he always expects objections to his first thesis and is ready to respond to objections. This corrective scheme becomes more and more obvious in the process of evolution of the thinker’s position. Whereas in the "Rules" it is implicit, after the "Discourse" Descartes already responds explicitly to the objections made to him in private letters. Even more explicitly the outlined scheme is present in the "Meditations", where to a large extent the replies to the objections are related to the metaphysical aspects of the "Discourse". Therefore, the "Replies" to the "Objections" on the "Meditations" are an integral part of the text, rather than an insignificant and superficial appendix. Moreover, this structure shows that Descartes saw his philosophy as born out of dialogue, not the isolated exercises of a solitary thinker. Marion’s thesis about the presence of communicative rationality in Descartes’ legacy is eloquent and important for us: "Cartesian reason is communicative, precisely because truth manifests itself as a display of evidence; indissolubly, at one and the same time, it is to one’s own reason and to the community of those looking on that the thing appears" (Marion, 2007, р. 33).

Studying the meaningful originality of the manifestations of the latter, it is worth noting that it is about the importance of communication with people. Descartes’ altruistic stance on philosophical truths has already been mentioned above. For him, other people (real and virtual interlocutors) are carriers of divine perfection, communication with whom helps a person solve the problem of improving his own nature. For this reason he appreciates and recommends to his interlocutors the reference to books, which are a form of representation of the vivid personalities of their authors (Descartes, 1996, AT IXB, p. 5). Here it is hard not to notice the consonance of Descartes’ ideas with those of contemporary hermeneutics, reinforced by his emphasis on the importance of education as self-education, the development of the individual as self-development (self-realization by A. Maslow).

Consistently implementing the precepts of Christianity, which are the basis of altruism, Descartes shares them and demonstrates his position in the way he treats the nature of the truths that are the subject of his attention. For him, the most important thing is not to impose a certain mode of existence on things, but care and concern for the innermost depths of the human spirit. A representative form of this concern for him is art and religion (Malivskyi, 2021).

Originality

For the first time in the research literature, the thesis of René Descartes as one of the forerunners of the open knowledge system is substantiated. The long period of neglect of the significance of Descartes’ teachings in the history of the system of open knowledge is explained by the dominance of a superficial vision of the basic intent of the thinker’s searches, which was complemented by the neglect of the anthropological nature of the main motives of his philosophizing. The arguments are given for the validity of Descartes’ interpretation of the demand of his own epoch for the search of effective forms of human improvement. A prerequisite for their true comprehension is an attention to the openness of human nature, which is expressed as the dialogical character of Descartes’ philosophy. Drawing on Christianity as the basis for altruism, Descartes demonstrates a caring attitude towards the position of others and recommends, in the process of self-development, focusing on openness in education and books/textbooks that represent the achievements of other individuals along the way.

Conclusions

The idea of interpreting Descartes’ philosophical legacy as a predictor of open knowledge and open education is justified under the condition of paying attention to the anthropological turn he made. It is now crucial for us that among the main problems of his work is understanding the nature of man and the motives for his behaviour.

This paper addresses the problem of the ways and means of human perfection from the perspective of university communities (teachers and librarians, who are historically included in the communication structure and system of the educational institution). It is about ways of creating, managing, using, preserving, and disseminating knowledge, among which the leading place belongs to the understanding of the forms of realization of the epoch’s request for the perfection of human nature. By exploring the nature of the knowledge that is important to us today, we find a meaningful counterpart to the open knowledge and open education in Descartes’ legacy. Drawing on Christianity as the basis for altruism, Descartes demonstrates a caring attitude towards the achievements of previous generations on the path of personal self-development. His attention is rightly drawn to education and books as representations of vibrant personalities. Their authentic and productive assimilation is possible only under the condition of a caring attitude towards the public good, which involves the intellectual volunteering of teachers and librarians. It is about self-realization through altruistic self-improvement, i.e. intellectual charity, which is especially evident today during martial law in Ukraine and is voluntary, conscious and free work for the benefit of others.

Librarians of universities in different countries for a long time have been experiencing a heavy financial burden (which is increasing every year) in the acquisition of funds both with printed scientific journals and those available through the Internet. Libraries are forced to refuse to purchase printed publications and access to electronic ones. This creates great barriers for researchers to learn about new developments in their fields, or to read, replicate, and verify others’ findings. Often, researchers must relinquish the copyrights they hold on their work when they agree to let journals publish it. Journal publishers then charge individual readers and libraries fees for access to these scholarly materials. Therefore, the principles of open education through the open access movement help university librarians to support their academic communities by providing access to the results of important research.

REFERENCES

Baldwin, J. W. (1971). The Scholastic Culture of the Middle Ages 1000-1300. Massachusetts: D.C. Heath and Company. (in English)

Brissey, P. (2013). Descartes’ Discours as a Plan for a Universal Science. Studia UBB. Philosophia, 58(3), 37-60. (in English)

Descartes, R. (1996). Oeuvres completes (Vols. 1-11). Paris: C. Adam et P. Tannery. (in French)

Kolesnykova, T. O. (2021). Resursy otkrytogo dostupa kak klyuch k globalnomu izmeneniyu v obrazovanii: rol universitetskikh bibliotek. Bіblіyatechny Vesnіk, 13, 43-53. Retrieved from http://eadnurt.diit.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/14279 (in Russian)

Kolesnykova, T. O., & Matveyeva, O. V. (2021). First Steps Before the Jump: Ukrainian University Librarians Survey About OER. University Library at a New Stage of Social Communications Development. Conference Proceedings, (6), 96-107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/unilib/2021_248379 (in English)

Malivskyi, A. M. (2019). Unknown Descartes: Anthropological Dimension of Rene Descartes’ Philosophical Searching. Dnipro: Herda. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/978-617-7639-22-9 (in Ukrainian)

Malivskyi, A. M. (2021). Lessons of Descartes: Metaphysicity of Man and Poetry. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (20), 125-133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i20.249593 (in English)

Marion, J.-L. (1999). On Descartes’ Metaphysical Prism: The Constitution and the Limits of Onto-theo-logy in Cartesian Thought (J. L. Kosky, Trans.). University of Chicago. (in English)

Marion, J.-L. (2007). On the Ego and on God: Further Cartesian Questions (C. M. Gschwandtner, Trans.). New York: Fordham University Press. (in English)

Merton, R. K. (1973). The Normative Structure of Science. In The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations (pp. 267-278). The University of Chicago Press. (in English)

OERSI: Ukrainian State University of Science and Technologies. (2022). Retrieved from https://oersi.org/resources?sourceOrganization=%5B%22Ukrainian+State+University+of+Science+and+Technologies%22%5D

Open knowledge. (2022, July 23). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_knowledge (in English)

Peter, S., & Deimann, M. (2013). On the role of openness in education: A historical reconstruction. Open Praxis, 5(1), 7-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.2491 (in English)

Pollock, R. (2006). The Value of the Public Domain. Institute for Public Policy Research. Retrieved from https://rufuspollock.com/papers/value_of_public_domain.ippr.pdf (in English)

Proleiev, S. V. (2014). Samovyznachennia osobystosti v konteksti "suspilstva znan". In Fenomen universytetu v konteksti "suspilstva znan" (pp. 135-153). Kyiv. (in Ukrainian)

Riddle, P. (1993). Political Authority and University Formation in Europe, 1200-1800. Sociological Perspectives, 36(1), 45-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1389441 (in English)

Santos-Hermosa, G., Proudman, V., & Corti, P. (2022). SPARC Europe Open Education in European Libraries of Higher Education Survey 2022. Zenodo. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7244713 (in English)

Schwab, R. N., Rex, W. E., & Lough, J. (1984). Inventory of Diderot’s Encyclopédie: Plates With a Study of the Contributors by John Lough. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation in association with Liverpool University Press. (in English)

U.S. PIRG. (2021, January 15). Department of Education announces latest round of Open Textbook Pilot grants. Retrieved from https://pirg.org/media-center/department-of-education-announces-latest-round-of-open-textbook-pilot-grants/ (in English)

What is open education? (n.d.). Opensource.com. Retrieved from https://opensource.com/resources/what-open-education (in English)

Zawacki-Richter, O., Conrad, D., Bozkurt, A., Aydin, C. H., Bedenlier, S., Jung, I., … Xiao, J. (2020). Elements of Open Education: An Invitation to Future Research. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 319-334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4659 (in English)

LIST OF REFERENCE LINKS

Baldwin J. W. The Scholastic Culture of the Middle Ages 1000-1300. Massachusetts : D.C. Heath and Company, 1971. 125 p.

Brissey P. Descartes’ Discours as a Plan for a Universal Science. Studia UBB. Philosophia. 2013. Vol. 58, No. 3. P. 37–60.

Descartes R. Oeuvres Complètes : in 11 vol. Paris : C. Adam et P. Tannery, 1996. 499 p.

Колесникова Т. А. Ресурсы открытого доступа как ключ к глобальному изменению в образовании: роль университетских библиотек. Бібліятэчны веснік. 2021. Вып. 13. С. 43–53. URL: http://eadnurt.diit.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/14279

Kolesnykova T. O., Matveyeva O. V. First Steps Before the Jump: Ukrainian University Librarians Survey About OER. University Library at a New Stage of Social Communications Development. Conference Proceedings. 2021. No. 6. P. 96–107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/unilib/2021_248379

Малівський А. М. Незнаний Декарт: антропологічний вимір у філософуванні. Дніпро : Герда, 2019. 300 с. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/978-617-7639-22-9

Malivskyi A. M. Lessons of Descartes: Metaphysicity of Man and Poetry. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research. 2021. No. 20. P. 125–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i20.249593

Marion J.-L. On Descartes’ Metaphysical Prism: The Constitution and the Limits of Onto-theo-logy in Cartesian Thought / trans. by J. L. Kosky. University of Chicago, 1999. 370 р.

Marion J.-L. On the Ego and on God: Further Cartesian Questions / trans. by C. M. Gschwandtner. New York : Fordham University Press, 2007. 277 p.

Merton R. K. The Normative Structure of Science. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. The University of Chicago Press, 1973. P. 267–278.

OERSI: Ukrainian State University of Science and Technologies. 2022. URL: https://oersi.org/resources?sourceOrganization=%5B%22Ukrainian+State+University+of+Science+and+Technologies%22%5D

Open knowledge. Wikipedia. 2022. URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_knowledge

Peter S., Deimann M. On the role of openness in education: A historical reconstruction. Open Praxis. 2013. Vol. 5, Iss. 1. P. 7–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.2491

Pollock R. The Value of the Public Domain. Institute for Public Policy Research, 2006. 18 р. URL: https://rufuspollock.com/papers/value_of_public_domain.ippr.pdf

Пролеєв С. В. Самовизначення особистості в контексті "суспільства знань". Феномен університету в контексті "суспільства знань". Київ, 2014. С. 135–153.

Riddle P. Political Authority and University Formation in Europe, 1200-1800. Sociological Perspectives. 1993. Vol. 36, Iss. 1. P. 45–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1389441

Santos-Hermosa G., Proudman V., Corti P. SPARC Europe Open Education in European Libraries of Higher Education Survey 2022. Zenodo. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7244713

Schwab R. N., Rex W. E., Lough J. Inventory of Diderot’s Encyclopédie: Plates With a Study of the Contributors by John Lough. Oxford : Voltaire Foundation in association with Liverpool University Press, 1984. 579 p.

Department of Education announces latest round of Open Textbook Pilot grants. U.S. PIRG. 2021. URL: https://pirg.org/media-center/department-of-education-announces-latest-round-of-open-textbook-pilot-grants/

What is open education? Opensource.com. URL: https://opensource.com/resources/what-open-education

Zawacki-Richter O., Conrad D., Bozkurt A., Aydin C. H., Bedenlier S., Jung I., … Xiao J. Elements of Open Education: An Invitation to Future Research. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2020. Vol. 21, No. 3. P. 319–334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4659

Т. О. КОЛЕСНИКОВА^1*, А. М. МАЛІВСЬКИЙ^2*

^1*Український державний університет науки і технологій (Дніпро, Україна), ел. пошта t.o.kolesnykova@ust.edu.ua, ORCID 0000-0002-4603-4375

Received: 29.07.2022

Accepted: 09.12.2022