У статті здійснено логічну реконструкцію інтердискурсивного поля між філософемами Мартіна Гайдеґґера і Теодора Адорно. На основі дослідження рефлексивної літератури визначено основні тенденції історико-філософської аналітики цього поля. Установлено, що ключовим концептуальним чинником напруження між досліджуваними дискурсами постає характер розуміння онтико-онтологічної відмінності. Визначено тактичні можливості застосування методологічних інструментів адорнівської ідеологічної критики в контексті історико-філософського освоєння творчості М. Гайдеґґера.

Heidegger proved to be one of the key thinkers of the last century. His philosophical legacy accompanied by affluent body of critical literature disclose the horizon for any local philosophical community, e. g. the Ukrainian one, to obtain its own language and problematic. To work out a appropriate receptive disposition towards Heidegger’s thought, we have to generalize the logics of some constituted histories of reading Heidegger in Continental, Anglo-Saxon, and Russian intellectual fields. Contemporary historico-philosophical discourse dominated by receptive disposition of (...) history of ideas omits social references of philosophical texts. This is symptomatic for ontological, existential, and lingual focuses on Heidegger, so characteristic for Ukrainian studies. We try to work out the interpretative disposition of situational analysis of Heidegger’s discourse on the methodological and conceptual basis provided by P. Bourdieu and R. Collins’s sociological views on Heidegger. Our goal here is to find a possibility to appropriate certain elements from sociology of knowledge to the apparatus of historico-philosophical analysis, although sociology of knowledge is suspected to be more valuable in explaining biasis than in accounting for correct opinions and adequate interpretations. This controversy between sociological and philosophical fields made us consider the critical reception of P. Bourdieu’s issues. What is really relevant to the tasks of historical and logical reconstructions of Heidegger’s thought, its contexts and evolution is Bourdieu’s claim to consider its polyphonic nature, its stylistics evolving from pragmatic force of Sein und Zeit to prophecies of the poetic thinking to come in the history of Being. We argue that such concepts of sociology of knowledge as structural homology, intellectual field, and symbolic capital can substantially enforce and enrich historico-philosophical studies, being framed in the disposition of situational analysis of philosophical texts. (shrink)

In the domain of the Ukrainian history of philosophy one can clearly observe symptoms of eclecticism, contamination, and corruption. Such situation is rooted in continuous insufficiency of the methodological framework of Ukrainian philosophy, split by the demise of Soviet ideological structures. Critical condition of humanitarian epistemology is aggravated by the urgent need to overtake foreign studies in the corresponding field, which constantly increase in number and evolve in character. All of the aforementioned symptoms are indicative for historical and philosophical reception (...) of Martin Heidegger's legacy by the Ukrainian academy. Heidegger studies have already formed a separate trend in the world philosophical discourse. We focus on critical assessment of certain reflexes, i.e. definite interpretative strategies providing different transcriptions of the same referents, i.e. definite philosophical forms, texts, or problems. In the general contour of Heidegger studies I differentiate the following reflexes: reflex of immanent hermeneutics, reflex of reductive interpretation, reflex of genetic historiography, and reflex of ideological historiography. In this paper I continue to identify transcriptions of "Heidegger's controversy" (the referent of historico-philosophical thought), provided by the reflex of ideological historiography. As I have recently identified the transcription of political implications of Heidegger's philosophy in the terms of sociology of knowledge, so now it comes to biographical transcription of Heidegger's political engagement, elaborated by Hugo Ott and Victor Farias. Critical assessment of their methodological approach revealed imposition of biographical objectivity on philosophy discourse, simplification of the complexity of philosophical form, and the pathos of elementary humanism as the ideological criterion of their research. (shrink)

Nowadays the Ukrainian historical and philosophical science is going through a harsh crisis of methodology, caused by distortion of universal coordinates of scientific thinking allegedly providing the condition of the so-called methodological pluralism. Numerous discussions focus on the question about the very scientific nature of history of philosophy as a branch of knowledge. The tendency which appears to prevail in such disputes defines history of philosophy as philosophy in contrast to the opinion that history of philosophy should be rather seen (...) as approximate to social history. This paper aims at revealing relevant methodological instruments of historical reconstruction of philosophical forms in the concreteness of their existence, conditioned by lives of real people with their real ends and drives. Thus we address Herbert Marcuse's critique of Martin Heidegger's philosophy, since once being a Heidegger's assistant he adopted a highly critical position towards his master's philosophy. Heidegger's Being and Time attracted Marcuse by existential analytics of Being-in-the-world of Dasein and the perspective on historicity of humane condition. In Marcuse's eye Heidegger had come close to the breakthrough towards maintaining of concrete philosophy, providing possibilities of philosophical approach to social realities. By 1932 Marcuse's attempts to reconcile categories of Heideggerian paradigm with strategies of Marxism proved to be a failure. After 1932 Marcuse finds the resources of theoretical enrichment in Marx's Economical and Political Manuscripts of 1844 and distances himself from Heidegger. Nevertheless Heideggerian moments appear to be employed further on in his thinking. Marcuse's critique provides us with an efficient assessment of Heidegger's key concepts as neutralized terms, unable of reaching out to the very reality of human existence, being ideological doubles of sociologicaly valid terminology. (shrink)

У статті розглянуто проблему методологічного оновлення української історико-філософської науки засобами філософської історіографії. Перехід від історії філософії до філософської історіографії уможливлює актуальні узагальнення щодо світового філософського процесу навіть у випадку дослідження таких різних філософських проектів, як критична теорія Теодора Адорно й фундаментальна онтологія Мартіна Гайдеґґера.