Analysis of two methodologies of knowledge (physicalist-reductive and humanitarian-philosophical)

The article analyzes two modern methodological strategies: one oriented towards classical methods of cognition, dating back to Aristotle, which involves the analysis of causality and the reduction of complex phenomena to simpler ideal objects, and the other related to humanitarian thinking and approaches. The first methodology is termed physicalist-reductionist by the author, while the second, following A.P. Ogurtsov, is called humanitarian-philosophical. The following problem is formulated: how are the development of the individual (the person, personality) and the development of humanity connected, as well as the history of an individual's life and the evolution of history, understood, among other things, from a cultural perspective, i.e., as discrete, changing with shifts in culture? While these processes (ontogeny and phylogeny, interpreted broadly rather than solely within a biological approach) are distinct. To address this issue, the author discusses two case studies: Plato's "Symposium" and a reconstruction of the work of Emanuel Swedenborg. Several planes of research are identified, which are connected, on one hand, to the logic and methodology of the author's investigation, and on the other hand, to how they correspond to reality (history, culture, language, creativity, reflection). The author asserts that it is unnecessary to determine how these realities are interconnected. He suggests that they have already formed, but the links between these realities are unknown, and it is not essential for solving most problems to know these connections. At the end of the article, within the framework of humanitarian-philosophical methodology, some issues regarding the transition from the modern era to the next great culture (the future culture) are discussed. In particular, the author claims that the heterogeneity of the development of communities and individuals on Earth, the growing egoism and social conflicts, the negative role of grand ideas, modern institutions not interested in serious changes, and several other factors compel us to recognize the idea of the noosphere as utopian.