Рецепція філософії дискурсу з перспективи зміни парадигм: український контекст

Anatoliy Yermolenko

doi:10.31649/sent45.02.066

Authors

Anatoliy Yermolenko H. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, NAS of Ukraine (Kyiv) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9908-6144

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31649/sent45.02.066

Keywords:

argumentation, deliberation, dialogue, ethics, translation, practical philosophy

Abstract

This article explores the philosophy of discourse as a factor of the communicative turn and the tendency of “rehabilitation of practical reason” from the perspective of a paradigmatic approach to philosophy. The importance of the receptions of the communicative paradigm, the place of translations of Western philosophical ideas in general in the development of domestic philosophy and their role in the revival of philosophy in Ukraine are shown. This article demonstrates that the drivers of the paradigmatic shift in Ukrainian philosophy are not only linked to the main trends of world philosophy, but are also organically connected with national traditions. These traditions are Hryhoriy Skovoroda’s Socratic dialogue and Oleksandr Potebnia’s philosophy of language. They were further developed in the analytical philosophy-inspired researches of Myroslav Popovych and Vasyl Lisovy, as well as in contemporary research at the Institute of Philosophy in the fields of pragmatism, communicative philosophy, and discourse ethics. The significance of the concept of dialogue as an organic component of the national philosophical culture and deliberative practices of Ukrainian society is noted.

Author Biography

Anatoliy Yermolenko, H. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, NAS of Ukraine (Kyiv)

Doctor of Sciences in Philosophy, Professor, Corresponding Member of the NAS of Ukraine, Director

References

Apel, K.-O. (1993). Nichtmetaphysische Letztbegründung? In E. Braun (Hrsg.), Die Zukunft der Vernunft aus der Perspektive einer nichtmetaphysischen Philosophie (S. 59-86). Würzburg: Konigshausen & Neumann.

Apel, K.-O. (2017). Transzendentale Reflexion und Geschichte. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

Apel, K.-O., Böhler, D., & Rebel, K. H. (Hrsg.). (1984). Praktische Philosophie/Ethik. Studientexte 1-3. Funkkolleg. Weinheim: Beltz.

Blumenberg, G. (2005). The World as a Book. (A. Yermolenko, Transl.). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Libra. https://ars.vntu.edu.ua/index.php/ars/catalog/book/380

Böhler, D. (1988). Die deutsche Zerstöhrung des politisch-ethischen Universalismus. Über die Gefahr des - heute (post-) modernen - Relativismus und Dezisionismus. In P. Rohs et al. (Hrsg.), Zerstöhrung des moralischen Selbstbewußtseins: Schance oder Gefärdung? Praktische Philosophie in Deutschland nach dem Nationalsozialismus (S. 166-216). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Böhler, D. (2013). Verbindlichkeit aus dem Diskurs. Denken und Handeln nach der sprachpragma-tischen Wende. München: Karl Alber.

Böhler, D. (2014). Responsibility for the Future from a Global Perspective. The Relevance of Hans Jonas's Philosophy and Discourse Ethics. (V. Yermolenko, Transl.). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Stylos.

Böhler, D. (2014). Verbindlichkeit aus dem Diskurs. Denken und Handeln nach der Wende zur kommunikativen Ethik - Orientierung in der ökologischen Dauerkrise. München: Karl Alber.

Böhler-Auras, C. (Hrsg.). (2000). Das Prinzip Mit-verantwortung. Ethik im Dialog. Report 2000. Berlin: Oberhofer.

Gronke, G. (2006). Socratic dialogue. Discursive ethics as a social ethics of responsibility and its dialogical practice. In A. Yermolenko (Ed.), Values of civil society and moral choice: Ukrainian experience (pp. 36-51). (V. Kebuladze, Transl.). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Etna-1.

Habermas, J. (1976). Zur Rekonstruktion des Historischen Materialismus. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Habermas, J. (1988). Nachmetaphisisches Denken. Philosophische Aufsätze. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Habermas, J. (2022). Ein neuer Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit und die deliberative Politik. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

Habermas, Yu. (1999). Unity of Mind in the Diversity of Its Voices. In A. M. Yermolenko, Communicative Practical Philosophy. Textbook (pp. 255-286). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Libra.

Henrich, D. (1987). Was ist Metaphysik - was Moderne? Thesen gegen Jürgen Habermas. In D. Henrich, Konzepte. Essays zur Philosophie in der Zeit (S. 11-41). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Hösle, V. (1999). Transcendental pragmatics as Fichteanism of intersubjectivity. In A. M. Yermolenko, Communicative practical philosophy. Textbook (pp. 455-478). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Libra.

Jonas, G. (2001). The principle of responsibility. In search of ethics for technological civilization. (A. Yermolenko & V. Yermolenko, Transl.). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Libra. https://ars.vntu.edu.ua/index.php/ars/catalog/book/366

Kant, I. (1977). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. In I. Kant, Werke in zwölf Bänden (B. 7). (W. Weischedel, Hrsg.). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Kant, I. (2004). Critique of practical reason. (I. Burkovsky, Transl.; A. Yermolenko, Ed.). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Universe.

Krohn, D., Neißer, B., & Walter, N. (Hrsg.). (1996). Diskurstheorie und Sokratischer Gespräch. Frankfurt am Main: Dipa.

Kuhlmann, W. (1985). Reflexive Letztbegründung. München: Karl Alber.

Lisovyi, V. (2014). Memories. Poems. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Smoloskyp.

Riedel, M. (Hrsg.). (1974). Rehabilitierung der praktischen Philosophie (B. 1-2). Freiburg: Rombach.

Schönherr-Mann, H.-M. (1995). Ein Anfang der Gerechtigkeit. Postmoderne Theorien des Politischen. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 49(1), 36-53.

Valyavko, I. (1997). Dmytro Chyzhevsky as a Researcher of Ukrainian Philosophical Thought [Doctoral dissertation, NAS of Ukraine, Institute of Philosophy]. [In Ukrainian]. D.I. Chyzhevsky National Library of Sciences (Kropyvnytskyi). https://library.kr.ua/wp-content/elib/valavko/osmislennya.pdf

Yermolenko, A. (2021). Discourse. Communication. Morality. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka.

Yermolenko, A. (2021a). Philosophy as a factor of spiritual independence of Ukraine. Filosofska dumka, (3), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.15407/fd2021.03.047

Yermolenko, A. (2021b). Socratic dialogue in Lesya Ukrainka’s poetic and practical philosophy. [In Ukrainian]. Filosofska dumka, (2), 20-36. https://doi.org/10.15407/fd2021.02.020

Yermolenko, A. (2021c). “Russian World” – the ideology of Russian imperialism. In G. P. Kovadlo & V. P. Volkovsky (Eds.), Philosophical Dialogues’2021. “Russian World” as a Doctrine: Origins, Threats, Methods (Vol. 21-22, pp. 15-26). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: G. S. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, NASU. https://ars.vntu.edu.ua/index.php/ars/catalog/book/290

Yermolenko, A. (2022). Resistance instead of argument. [In Ukrainian]. Filosofska dumka, (3), 59-63. https://dumka.philosophy.ua/index.php/fd/article/view/617

Yermolenko, A. (2022a). Main issues of philosophy. In I. M. Dzyuba, A. I. Zhukovsky, M. G. Zheleznyak et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Modern Ukraine (Vol. 24, pp. 778-779). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Institute of Encyclopedic Research of the National Academy of Sciences.

Yermolenko, A. (2025). The relevance of the universalist ethics of responsibility in the conditions of war and crisis of the value-normative order. [In Ukrainian]. Filosofska dumka, (1), 66-81. https://doi.org/10.15407/fd2025.01.066

Yermolenko, A. (2026). Transcendental pragmatics in the topos of the hermeneutic-linguistic-pragmatic-semiotical turn. [In Ukrainian]. Filosofska dumka, (1), 7-23. https://doi.org/10.15407/fd2026.01.007

Yermolenko, A., Popovych, M., Malakhov, V., & Kovadlo, G. (2017). Dialogue as a path to understanding. Monograph. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: H. S. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, NASU.