PHILOSOPHICAL BASES OF CLASSIFICATION AND TYPOLOGY IN THE SCIENCES OF RELIGION

Introduction. This article is devoted to the general philosophical justification of methods of classification and typology within their problematic relationship with the subject of science of religion. In the introductory part of the article, the need to problematize orderly methods in the sciences of religion is identified and the structure of the subsequent presentation is briefly described. Content. Recognizing that the classification method belongs to the field of logic, the study problematizes the cognitive status of logic and finds ontological and gnoseological boundaries of this science. The study points to irrational elements in the object of the sciences of religion, referring to some theoretical developments in anthropology, philosophy and phenomenology of religion. The question of the limits of the applicability of logical methods for learning such objects is formulated. There is a need to problematize logic from the positions of philosophy of being and philosophy of thinking. The different points of view of researchers on the ontological and gnoseological basis of the classification method are considered. The strengths and weaknesses of the positions considered are analysed. It is justified to consider this question from the standpoint of philosophical criticism. On the basis of theoretical provisions of critical ontology and critical epistemology, a common problematic nucleus emerges, on the basis of which methods of classification and typology arise. Structural consequences are defined, which have the power to apply methods of organization to a specific subject of sciences about religion. On the basis of the revealed ontological antiposition of modules of factuality and materiality, and the revealed episodic antiposition of idiotic and nomothetic, the ontological, enological and substantive bases of methods of organization are defined. Based on these bases, first intermediate and then essential definitions of classification methods and typology are built. On the basis of the results obtained, it is indicated a way to move from the general consideration of regularizing methods to their subject-specific application in the sciences of religion. Conclusions. The final part of the study briefly describes the intermediate results that emerged during the previous study. On the basis of the results obtained, a final conclusion is drawn on the appropriate way to structure the subject and inter-subject sciences of religion in connection with the implementation of general classification and typological tasks.