Deborinians are philosophers of science (social and humanitarian sciences)

The article attempts to give a panoramic overview of the works of philosophers of the school of Academician A.M. Deborin in the field of philosophical problems of social sciences and humanities. This article continues the study begun in the previous article on this topic, devoted to the contribution of the philosophers of the Deborin school to the development of the philosophy and methodology of the natural and axiomatic sciences. The very model of the organization of philosophical knowledge by type: philosophical methodology – philosophical problems of particular sciences – was formed in the Deborin school, then developed in Soviet philosophy and after the defeat of the Deborin school, and in general, with the corresponding changes, was inherited by post-Soviet philosophy. At the same time, those philosophers who laid the foundations for the development of philosophical problems of individual sciences were forgotten, since almost all of them were repressed, and their works were withdrawn from free access in libraries. The formation of the problematics of the philosophical problems of sciences during the thaw period was based on the traditions of the Deborin school. But at the same time, the names of philosophers themselves were erased from history. This article will focus on those representatives of the Deborin school who dealt with the philosophical problems of psychology (B.A. Fingert, M.L. Shirvindt, I.D. Sapir, I.F. Kurazov, Yu.V. Frankfurt), political economy (B.S. Borilin), law (I.P. Razumovsky), sociology (F.E. Telezhnikov), ideology and politics (N.N. Bobrovnikov, S.I. Novikov), history (S.S. Krivtsov), history of science (Ya.M. Uranovsky), history of technology (H.I. Garber). The most general characteristic of their scientific works, the problems they posed, the philosophical positions they occupied are given. The relevance of the individual provisions put forward by them in the field of philosophy and methodology of specific sciences is noted.

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy of Science and Technology
Published
2024-10-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2024-29-2-149-160
Primary Topic
Tree-ring climate responses
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Deborinians are philosophers of science (social and humanitarian sciences)

Philosophy of Science and Technology
Tree-ring climate responses
article

Deborinians are philosophers of science (social and humanitarian sciences)

article en

Abstract

The article attempts to give a panoramic overview of the works of philosophers of the school of Academician A.M. Deborin in the field of philosophical problems of social sciences and humanities. This article continues the study begun in the previous article on this topic, devoted to the contribution of the philosophers of the Deborin school to the development of the philosophy and methodology of the natural and axiomatic sciences. The very model of the organization of philosophical knowledge by type: philosophical methodology – philosophical problems of particular sciences – was formed in the Deborin school, then developed in Soviet philosophy and after the defeat of the Deborin school, and in general, with the corresponding changes, was inherited by post-Soviet philosophy. At the same time, those philosophers who laid the foundations for the development of philosophical problems of individual sciences were forgotten, since almost all of them were repressed, and their works were withdrawn from free access in libraries. The formation of the problematics of the philosophical problems of sciences during the thaw period was based on the traditions of the Deborin school. But at the same time, the names of philosophers themselves were erased from history. This article will focus on those representatives of the Deborin school who dealt with the philosophical problems of psychology (B.A. Fingert, M.L. Shirvindt, I.D. Sapir, I.F. Kurazov, Yu.V. Frankfurt), political economy (B.S. Borilin), law (I.P. Razumovsky), sociology (F.E. Telezhnikov), ideology and politics (N.N. Bobrovnikov, S.I. Novikov), history (S.S. Krivtsov), history of science (Ya.M. Uranovsky), history of technology (H.I. Garber). The most general characteristic of their scientific works, the problems they posed, the philosophical positions they occupied are given. The relevance of the individual provisions put forward by them in the field of philosophy and methodology of specific sciences is noted.

Philosophy of Science and TechnologyVol. 29(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Tree-ring climate responses
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.