«Самооправдание философии»: «междисциплинарность» как способ «встроиться» в «дисциплинарную структуру» современной науки

Abstract

The existence of academic philosophy has been in question for over hundred years; the domestic «workshop of professional philosophers» was able to almost assess after the loss of ideological function by university philosophy the perseverance and the intensity of efforts to «abolish philosophy from curricula». In this regard, professional philosophers are forced to make efforts to present the subject of philosophy and its capabilities in a way that proves the «benefit» and shows the «organic connection» of philosophy to the disciplinary structured «positive sciences». One of the most «influential» and «innovative» ways to present philosophy as a «place to exercise interdisciplinary» is the subject of this paper; analysis of the basic forms of «recipe» by philosophy of «the principle of interdisciplinary» is done; the «essence» and «perspectives» of the named transformation of the subject of philosophy are revealed in the paper in the horizon of the «radical» understanding of the subject of philosophy by M. Heidegger. It is established that in the Heidegger perspective of the definition of the subject of philosophy, efforts aimed at «synthesizing» philosophical methodological justification with the practice of scientific research carried out in «positive sciences» (first of all in natural science) are quite superfluous: New European philosophy, until any special «instrumentalization» of it, is already in «unity» with New European science, and essentially — in the common basis for them. All subsequent attempts at synthesis are due to the uncertainty of philosophy about its «subject», and confusion about its function in the modern system of knowledge. It was concluded that in the process of «learning» interdisciplinary, the traditional functions of philosophy — «methodological» and «inclusive» (K. Jaspers) are realized primarily through justified proposals to change the language of discussions in order to achieve «consensus» (B. Holbrook); philosophy performs the «critical» function by «involving» philosophical knowledge in topical «discussions» on social and political issues (R. Frodman). The paper concludes that the perspectives of the studied direction of the “transformation” of academic philosophy can only be assessed by agreeing/not agreeing with the proposed innovative «revision» of the understanding of the «essence of philosophical knowledge».