The author implements the concept of "subject education" as one that contributes to forming two features of the personality: subjectivity as freedom of thought and subjectity as freedom of action. The author notes that this approach contributes to the formation of European consciousness, a specific feature of which is the interpretation of man as a "subject".
Only scholarly articles since 2015 are shown. To see more, please click here or use filters on the right side.
-
Yasna, I. (2015). Tolerance in mono-subjective and poly-subjective societies. Worldview and value self-determination of man: Proceedings of the IV International Scientific and Practical Conference of Young Scientists (Chernivtsi, May 8-9, 2015), 100-105.
The category "subjectivity" is considered as a characteristic of self-awareness of a particular society of its ontological place in the world through the attitude to a particular subject, which he may consider himself (as in the Cartesian paradigm of subjectivity), God (as in European the Middle Ages), etc. Accordingly, there are four paradigms of subjectivity: We-subjectivity, He-subjectivity, I-subjectivity, They-subjectivity. The last two paradigms can be defined as poly-subjective, as opposed to mono-subjective, where there is an idea of a single external entity. Only within them, ideas of tolerance are possible.
-
Yasna, I. (2014). Subjective paradigm as the basis of a modern approach to education. Bulletin of Donetsk National University, No 1-2, 509–514.
The author proposes the concept of "subject education" as one that contributes to forming of two features: subjectivity as freedom of thought and subjectivity as freedom of action. This approach contributes to the formation of European consciousness, a specific feature of which is the interpretation of man as a "subject". As the main components of the "subject" the author singles out subjectivity (as a purely European interpretation of cognition) and subjectity (as a specific understanding of the place and role of man in the world). Accordingly, the components of subject education are philosophy (which develops subjectivity) and the basics of entrepreneurship (which contributes to subjectity). The project can be implemented through the cooperation of leading academic institutions in the field of philosophy and business education, with the involvement of successful practitioners - current businessmen, politicians, and public figures.
-
Yasna, I. (2014). The man in search of subjectivity: between everyday life and... Donetsk Bulletin of the Shevchenko Scientific Society. Vol. XXXIX. Philosophy. Pedagogy. Methodology. 84-92.
The article presents the ontological interpretation of the category "subjectivity" as a fundamental philosophical category, the content of which determines the contours and structure of the ontological model of the world.
-
Kyselova, Y. (2013). From “subject” and “subjectivity” to “subjectity”: an attempt of terminological analysis. Epistemological Studies in Philosophy, Social and Political Sciences, 2(23), 135-140.
https://visnukpfs.dp.ua/index.php/PFS/article/view/498The actual contemporary problem of the «crisis of the European subject» is largely caused by several terminological inaccuracies which require a number of clarifications. In particular, the term «subjectivity» should be added to the philosophic vocabulary and vocabularies of other humanities and social sciences and a clear distinction between the concepts of «subjectivity» and «subjectity» should be determined. These two terms should characterize the two qualities, two abilities of a subject – cognitive capacity and agency. It also seems useful to transfer the research interest from the static category «subject», fixing a particular historical type of «subject» – the European subject of the age of Modernity, to the dynamic category that points to the very quality of being a subject and can vary from age to age. The term «subjectity» seems to be the most suitable term for this.
There is also a need to overcome the dissociation of the field of values of the «subject» term by combining its epistemological, anthropological, and sociological aspects in a general structure of subjectity which thus determines his ability to be the subject of cognition, action and interaction and can be considered as system specifications of the person and society. The structure of subjectity includes three elements (modes): subjective (epistemological dimension of subjectity), intrasubjective (anthropological dimension) and intersubjective (social dimension). Taken together these three modes of subjectity form the fourth (ontological) mode of subjectity, which also determines the three relevant areas of the reflection about the subject and transfuses all levels of individual and social life.
The type of subjectity differs from age to age and from culture to culture, so it can serve as a criterion of periodization of historical ages and be the basis for a typology of cultural systems, reducing them to a «common denominator». The synthesis of epistemological, anthropological and sociological aspects of the interpretation of subjectity allows considering it as the system characteristics of the man and the society.