„Faktopoklonniki“ i intuitivisty: metodologičeskij spor v istorii iskusstva

0557128 - SLÚ 2023 RIV CZ rus J - Článek v odborném periodiku
Jančárková, Julie - Gagen, S.
„Faktopoklonniki“ i intuitivisty: metodologičeskij spor v istorii iskusstva.
[Admirers of Facts and of Intuition: a Methodological debate in the History of Art.]
Byzantinoslavica. Roč. 79, 1-2 (2021), s. 258-268. ISSN 0007-7712
Institucionální podpora: RVO:68378017
Klíčová slova: Kondakov * Ajnalov * Lazarev
Obor OECD: Specific literatures
Způsob publikování: Pouze metadata

Statja posvjaščena metodologii, kotoruju ispolzoval N. P. Kondakov. V literature často upominajetsja ponjatije „faktopoklonnikov“ i „faktopoklonničestva“, kotoryje avtory popytalis rasšifrovat kak metaforu, označajuščuju stil myšlenija gruppy učjonych i ich obščeje mirovozzrenije. Dalee avtory rassmotreli ukazannyj stil s točki zrenija vozmožnosti postiženija istiny. Kondakov kak sledujet iz jego textov priznaval suščestvovanije objektivnoj jistiny. V statje analizirujetsja objemnaja kritičeskaja statja V. N. Lazareva o Kondakově, otrazivšaja polemiku Kondakova s A. Rieglem ili polemiku pozitivistov s intuitivistami, storonikom Rieglja i intuitivistov neožidanno vystupajet i sovětskij učenyj Lazarev. V 1925 godu Lazarev faktičeski razgromil naučnyj metod Kondakova. Dannaja situacija otražajet složnost i zaputannsot stanovlenija istorii iskusstva kak nauki v SSSR.

The article devotes itself to Kondadov’s methodology. Such notions being mentioned in scientific literature so frequently as «facts worshipers (faktopokloniki) and «facts worship (faktopoklonichestvo)», which were regarded by authors as metaphors, really characterised a style of thinking of the group of scholars based on their common position in the theory of knowledge. The very principle question should be a one touching possibility of comprehension of objective truth. By investigating this style of mind in the context of the theory of knowledge the authors try to show the gnoseological position of Kondakov and of his opponents. A closer examination of his texts reveals that Kondakov recognised the objective truth, its existence and the possibilities of its comprehension. What about his opponents, their position was displayed through the analysis of the large critical article of V. N. Lazarev depicting the polemic of Kondakov against A. Riegl which could be regarded as a polemic between positivists and so-called intuitivists. It was unexpected and paradoxical that in spite of his official marxism the soviet scholar V. Lazarev belongs to Riegl’s supporters. In fact, in the year 1925 Lazarev critically denied Kondakov’s scientific method. Far from having any relationship to marxism Kondakov’s method appears to belong to the same philosophic tradition as the latter. This paradoxical situation demonstrates the complexity of the question of the formation of the History of Arts as science in the Soviet Union.
Trvalý link: http://hdl.handle.net/11104/0331401