The Significance of Philosophical Anthropology in Determining the Methodology of Modern Scientific Research

O. N. Kubalskyi

doi:10.15802/ampr.v0i24.295311

Authors

O. N. Kubalskyi Dobrov Institute for Scientific and Technological Potential and Science History Studies of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7956-3150

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i24.295311

Keywords:

philosophical anthropology, methodology of modern scientific research, scientific picture of the world, natural attitude, anthropocosmism, values

Abstract

Purpose. This research involves revealing the methodological significance of the anthropological understanding of values for conducting modern scientific research. Theoretical basis. Philosophical anthropology acts as an epistemological basis for answers to ontological questions that are part of the structure of such problems in modern science as the construction of a scientific picture of the world, the ordering of data of natural attitude, and anthropocosmism. The ontological basis for the formation of the anthropological theory of values is the teaching of Wilhelm Leibniz, Immanuel Kant, Rudolf Lotze, and Martin Heidegger. Originality. The creation of a scientific picture of the world, the research of natural attitude, and an anthropological approach to cosmology carried out from the viewing angle of the philosophy of values show the close mutual conditioning of these scientific issues. A successful determination of one’s value positions by a scientist-researcher is impossible without his/her agreeing with his/her picture of the world with the prevailing ideas about the world in their society. Such ideas are studied by anthropocosmism, which researches not so much the world in itself, but a view of this world from the standpoint of the existing state of society and the main intentions of its development. Conclusions. The value attitude of scientists at a certain stage of the development of scientific knowledge forms their picture of the world, which has the form of self-explanatory scientific provisions. The facts of modern physics must always, one way or another, receive their legitimation through the world of the human natural attitude. Even the unobservable characteristics of the microcosm are explained by appealing to knowledge about the observable characteristics of the world. The anthropocentric nature of cosmology is determined by the fact that in modern philosophy, the values of a person explain not only the way of one’s cognition but also the way of one’s inclusion in the world.

References

Boichenko, M. I. (2021). Human Evolution: the Limits of Technocentrism. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (19), 15-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i19.235956 (in English)

Bonnet, E., Landivar, D., Monnin, A., & Navarro Aguiar, U. (2022, June-July). Design beyond the human world of management and organizations: Towards a cosmology for the anthropocene. In DRS2022: Bilbao. Bilbao, Spain. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2022.654 (in English)

Heidegger, M. (1961). Nietzsche (Vol. 2). Pfullingen: Günther Neske. (in German)

Heidegger, M. (2002). The Age of the World Picture (1938). In Off the Beaten Track (J. Young & K. Haynes, Trans., pp. 57-85). Cambridge University Press. (in English)

Honcharenko, V. A. (2019). The Concept of the World Picture in Late Writings of Ludwig Wittgenstein and Martin Heidegger. Bulletin of the Cherkasy Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University. Series Philosophy, (1), 35-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31651/2076-5894-2019-1-35-40 (in English)

Husserl, E. (1960). Cartesian Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology (D. Cairns, Trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (in English)

Jansen, F. K. (2018). Quantum Mechanics Requires an Observer Context Distinguishing between Reality and its Mental Representation. Preprints. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201802.0068.v1 (in English)

Kant, I. (1781). Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Riga: J. F. Hartknoch. (in German)

Kremen, V. H., & Ilin, V. V. (2022). Philosophy of Human-Centrism in the System of Anthropological Studies. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (21), 5-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i21.260429 (in English)

Kubalskyi, O. N. (2022). Communicative Approach to Determining the Role of Personality in Science. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (22), 36-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i22.271325 (in English)

Kubalskyi, O. (2023). Academic values as a basis for international scientific communication. Synesis, 15(1), 490-500. Retrieved from https://seer.ucp.br/seer/index.php/synesis/article/view/2693 (in English)

Lazarovici, D., Oldofredi, A., & Esfeld, M. (2018). Observables and Unobservables in Quantum Mechanics: How the No-Hidden-Variables Theorems Support the Bohmian Particle Ontology. Entropy, 20(5). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/e20050381 (in English)

Lotze, R. H. (2017). Mikrokosmos: Ideen zur Naturgeschichte und Geschichte der Menschheit. Versuch einer Anthropologie. Hamburg: Felix Meiner. (in German)

Melnyk, V. P., & Lushch-Purii, U. I. (2022). Revising Anthropocentrism of Technics in the Light of the 21st Century New Anthropological Models. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (21), 72-83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i21.260334 (in English)

Olafson, F. A. (2019). Philosophical anthropology. In Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/philosophical-anthropology (in English)

Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four: A Novel. London: Secker & Warburg. (in English)

Otoo, B. K. (2020). Declaring My Ontological and Epistemological Stance: A Reflective Paper. The Journal of Educational Thought, 53(1), 67-88. (in English)

Reid, T. (1997). An Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense: A Critical Edition (D. R. Brookes, Ed.). Edinburgh University Press. (in English)

Sivinski, S., & Ulatowski, J. (2019). The Anthropocentrism of the Cosmic Perspective Argument. Ethics and the Environment, 24(1), 1-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2979/ethicsenviro.24.1.01 (in English)

Strickland, L. (2014). Leibniz’s Monadology: A New Translation and Guide. Edinburgh University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748693238 (in English)

Yulianto, H. (2021). Philosophy of management science: Ontology, epistemology, and axiology perspectives. Cross-Border Journal of Business Management, 1(1), 152-162. (in English)