SPECIFICITY OF HUMANITARIAN KNOWLEDGE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24919/2522-4700.50.5Keywords:
humanitarian knowledge, socio-humanitarian knowledge, nature, society, socium, biological, socialAbstract
The purpose of the article is the analysis of the features of humanitarian knowledge emergence and functioning, its content field and structure; the studing of the extent of the information presence about society and the social existence of man. Methodological basis. Since humanitarian knowledge is meaningful information about the existence of man as an individual and the existence of society, the initial methodological basis for its understanding is the distinction between biological and non-biological characteristics of individuals and the allocation of essential features of society.In a such way the sphere of the object of this knowledge outlines.Considering that it is presented in two ways in the conceptual and content dimensions – as humanitarian and socio-humanitarian knowledge itself, – the author shows the commonality and difference of these formations. This is fundamentally important, because this issue is often either not paid attention to at all in the literature sphere, or the mentioned formations are considered as not very different. Scientific Novelty. The main biological and social characteristics of man are highlighted and briefly analyzed. It is shown that the latter, by «unfolding» them in the process of activity of individuals and various social groups, produce to a large extent the content field of humanitarian knowledge. Another part of this field is knowledge about the features of society, the specifics of its functioning. In the context of the commonality and differences of humanitarian and socio-humanitarian knowledge, the content of the concepts of «Society» is distinguished «Social» and «Public».Conclusions. Humanitarian (social-humanitarian) knowledge is the result of understanding the non-biological existence of man and the existence of society in its social dimension (as a society).At the same time, not everything that is related to human life and the functioning of society is included in the content of this knowledge. It has a rather complex structure and a pronounced anthropocentric character.
References
1. Лук’янець В. С., Кравченко О. М., Мороз О. Я [та ін.]. Природознавство і гуманітарія. Пошуки взаєморозуміння. Київ: Вид. ПАРАПАН, 2009. 317 с.
2. Павлов В. Суспільні відносини як форма прояву людської діяльності. Правові, економічні та соціокультурні засади регулювання суспільних відносин: сучасні реалії та виклики часу: матеріали Всеукр. наук.-практ. конф., м. Полтава, 10 грудня 2019 р. Полтава: Полтавський інститут економіки і права Університету «Україна», 2019. С. 234–239.
3. Пролєєв С. Соціокультурні підвалини дискурсу та трансформації сучасності. Філософська думка. 2022. № 2. Київ: Видавничий дім «Академперіодика» НАН України, 2022. С. 67–81.
4. Tsivatyi V. Hr. Diplomatic Protocol and Etiquette of International Courtesy in International Relations and World Politics of the 21st Century: Innovative, Historical-Institutional and Political-Systemic Discourses. International scientific conference «The Study of Topical Issues of Modern Society from the Perspective of History, Political Science, Sociology and Philosophy»: conference proceedings (August 30–31, 2022. Riga, the Republic of Latvia). Riga, Latvia: Baltija Publishing, 2022. P. 60–66.