Philosophical sciences/2. Social philosophy

Popov V.V., Scheglov B.S.

Doctor philosophy, Doctor philosophy,

Loytarenko M.V.

Graduate student

Rostov State University of Economics (RINH), Taganrog Institute named A. P. Chekhov (branch), Taganrog, Russia

TO THE QUESTION OF GERMENEVTICAL APPROACH TO HISTORY

When the discourse concerns the problems connected with the appeal to germenevtical disclosure of history, in this case to priority roles there is a concept of historical representation. Historical representation can be understood differently, thus it becomes illegal a peculiar second step in relation to historical knowledge. But, on the other hand, in this direction historical representation should be considered as some attitude of historical knowledge towards those historical objects which fall within the scope of analytical representations of the researcher concerning these or those segments of history as this analytical representation is justified by that in similar cases a subject as that in empirical experience isn't presented.

We will pay attention that historical representation will be connected not with some certain empirical feelings of the social subject, and it is rather with semantic and pragmatical aspects of the social subject concerning those fragments when there is a certain process connected with an obtaining value. The similar obtaining value is a little artificial procedure because in similar situations the social subject deals not with social reality as with a reality, namely that he puts forward as the sphere and further an object subject of the research.

We will note that the social subject in similar cases claims that subjects of this sort are represented only when they give in to some cogitative processing on the one hand, and on the other hand when in general they are thought as those. Thus historical representations which can act through a sign ratio to object of research pass into a framework of the linguistic philosophy connected with questions of social philosophy and come to problems of semantics and semiotics. Therefore when in similar cases the speech comes about that, interpretation of historical knowledge is how valid, it must be kept in mind that the similar knowledge can't be valid in some empirical sense though it is necessary to say that it is that in some subjective sense.

The matter is that considering a ratio historical and logical in scientific knowledge, it is necessary to pay attention that itself historical in a similar case it is possible to consider not as a certain object of research, and within more simplified program connected by that the object is narrowed till the way. Similar transformation concerns that the researcher the forefront of the historical nominates the most social subject.

The consideration of the social subject connected with the social phenomena, processes the facts represents not literally that they really represented or represent, and are more connected with how they, actually, are thought of us.

The problem is complicated also by that if to consider the historical phenomena, to connect them with concrete informative abilities of reason of the person, to present historical events, historic facts, historical processes, anyway the researcher faces problems which in general are quite natural but which thus are solvable as it is necessary to accept at least one of two positions in insufficient degree: or we argue on that historical material which is given in sources, researches, texts and so on, or we say that these historic facts or the phenomena are capable to be a subject of our empirical perception.

In the latter case it isn't possible as, by definition, the history is in the past and it should be studied only on the relevant sources, historical events and the facts. That is there is a certain circle in research. However the similar circle has a number of permissions, decisions and designations.

There is rather interesting problem connected with as far as in language expression of a certain communication between historic facts and historical events from the point of view of their understanding and interpretation is possible. In this context we will pay attention that if to speak about historic facts, from a position of the present it is difficult to speak about their interpretation or understanding without correlation of similar procedures with last time as the facts and the phenomena took place in the past, and this last time has to correlate with the present to receive a certain correlation.

Besides this correlation there is also other not less important problem, namely: assessment problem. If in the present the tools for an assessment of these or those facts of the past aren't developed, there is other question. It is a question that historic facts for additional interpretation demand new, perhaps deeper analysis and correlation with that present in which there is a researcher.

However it is one side of the problem, is also other party. How researcher within the present is trained for similar work, that is we face specifically the social subject having the intentions, desires, representations, installations, outlooks and that as far as he with all these characteristics is capable to apprehend these or those historical characteristics, in this case in the form of the facts.

It is a big problem which in this direction didn't find the due reflection in modern literature though we consider that the problems put in a number of works on post-nonclassical rationality grant the right to claim that, arguing on the questions connected with internal installations of the social subject it is necessary to understand as far as these installations can correlate with last and future segments within some historical process.

Literature

1. V.V. Popov, B.S. Scheglov. The theory of rationality. Rostov-on-Don, 2006. 320 p.