по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > The editors and editorial board > Peer-review process > Peer-review in 24 hours: How do we do it? > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Publication in 72 hours: How do we do it? > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

Публикация за 72 часа - теперь это реальность!
При необходимости издательство предоставляет авторам услугу сверхсрочной полноценной публикации. Уже через 72 часа статья появляется в числе опубликованных на сайте издательства с DOI и номерами страниц.
По первому требованию предоставляем все подтверждающие публикацию документы!
MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Genesis: Historical research
Reference:

Formation of the tradition of archetypal research of public-authority organization
Mamychev Aleksei Yur'evich

Professor, the department of Theory and History of Russian and Foreign Law, Vladivostok State University of Economics and Service

690014, Russia, Primorsky Krai, Vladivostok, Gogolya Street 41, office #5501

mamychev@yandex.ru
Другие публикации этого автора
 

 

Abstract.

Formation of the tradition of archetypal research of public-authority organization
The subject of this research is the historical-political examination of the process of establishment and ideological-conceptual evolution of the notion of “archetype”, as well as the comprehensive analysis of formation of the archetypal tradition of cognition of the grounds of public-authority organization. The article substantiates the fact that the relevance and demand of the study of archetypal grounds is associated with the reconstruction of adequate to society forms of political-legal organization, as well as sustainable directions on institutional-authority development. In addition to that, the author underlines that within the history of political and legal thought there are various traditions of archetypal research, which are not reduced to just a single theoretical-conceptual format – analytical psychology that discovers the new heuristic opportunities in examination of the sustainable components of sociocultural evolution of the public-authority organization. The methodological and theoretical foundation is mostly based on developments on the area of political science, history of political teachings that belong to the Russian and foreign specialists, as well as separate positions of the theory of archetypes and political anthropology. The scientific novelty of this work consists in systematization and substantial interpretation of the fundamental directions in development of the archetypal traditions that ate based on the diverse worldview, philosophical, mythological, religious, and other grounds. The article proves that the ideas on the unified archetypal tradition, which originates from Plato and continues to the modern socio-humanitarian discourse, are erroneous. In reality, there are different ideological-conceptual vectors of understanding and interpretation of the concept of “arche”, which is associated with the establishment of a special direction in research of the in-depth foundations of social organization and political-legal thinking activity. At the same time, in this multiplicity of archetypal traditions, it is possible to highlight and conceptualize the core ideas, concurrent interpretations, as well as similar forms of cognition of the hidden and meaningful foundations of society, state, authority, and politics.  

Keywords: political organization, methodology, culture, policy, power, antiquity, archetype, political philosophy, tradition, evolution

DOI:

10.7256/2409-868X.2017.1.21077

Article was received:

19-11-2016


Review date:

15-11-2016


Publish date:

09-02-2017


This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
Lebedev A. V. Arkhe // Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya / In-t filosofii RAN. M.: Mysl', 2010. S. 145-156.
2.
Bachinin V.A. Entsiklopediya filosofii i sotsiologii prava. SPb., 2006. S. 95.
3.
Khyubner K. Istina mifa. M., 1996. S. 122.
4.
Marinosyan T.E. Arkhetip kak ponyatie filosofskoi antropologii. Avtoref… kand. fil. nauk. M., 1998. S. 5.
5.
Kant I. Sobranie sochinenii v vos'mi tomakh. T.3. M., 1982. S. 283-284.
6.
Platon. Gosudarstvo. M., 2005. 544 s.
7.
Lebedev A. V. Ob iznachal'noi formulirovke traditsionnogo tezisa ΤΗΝ ΑΡΧΗΝ ΥΔΩΡ ΕΙΝΑΙ,-Balcanica. Lingvistich. issledovaniya. M., 1979. S. 167-186.
8.
Aristotel'. Metafizika. M., 2015. 448 s.
9.
Plotin. O bessmertii dushi // Voprosy filosofii. 1984. № 3. S. 118-158.
10.
Losev A. Istoriya antichnoi estetiki. Pozdnii ellinizm. M., 1980. S. 86.
11.
Yung K.G. Instinkt i bessoznatel'noe [Elektronnyi resurs]. Rezhim dostupa: http://www.oculus.ru/stat.php?id=52 (data obrashcheniya 10.10.2016 g.)
12.
Genon R. Simvolika kresta. M., 2008. S. 392.
13.
Averintsev S.S. Arkhetipy // Mify narodov mira: entsiklopediya. T.1. M., 1980. S. 111.
14.
Averintsev S.S. Simvol. Arkhetipy // Sofiya-Logos. Slovar'. 2-e, ispr. izd.-K.: Dukh i Litera, 2001. S. 155-161.
15.
Meletinskii E.M. Poetika mifa. M., 2012. S. 331.
16.
Menzhulin V. Raskoldovyvaya Yunga: ot apologetiki k kritike. K., 2002. S. 342.
17.
Pelipenko A.A., Yakovenko I.G. Kul'tura kak sistema. M., 1998. S. 81.
18.
Lyubashits V.Y., Mamychev A.Y., Vronskaya M.V., Timofeeva A.A. Socio-economic and Public-power Aspects of State and Society Relations in Modernizing Russia //International Review of Management and Marketing. 2016. T. 6. № 6. S. 116-120.
19.
Galsanova O.E. Interpretatsiya ponyatiya «arkhetip»: ot antichnoi kul'tury do kul'turologicheskii myslei nachala KhKh veka // Vestnik buryatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2011. № 6. S. 223.
20.
Mamychev A.Y., Filippova M.K., Lyubashits V.Y., Shalyapin S.O. Prognostic Problems of the Public and Power Organization of the Russian Society: Archetypes and Sociocultural Basis of Functioning and Development // International Review of Management and Marketing. 2016. T. 6. № 6. S. 85-89.
21.
E. V. Pavlova Ponimanie nravstvennoi otvetstvennosti vlasti v trudakh drevnerusskikh myslitelei // Pravo i politika. - 2012. - 4. - C. 767 - 772.
22.
Demetradze M.R. Vertikal'no-voskhodyashchaya strategiya i gorizontal'no-niskhodyashchie protsessy perekhodnogo perioda. Institutsional'nye i neinstitutsional'nye protsessy modernizatsii // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2016. - 2. - C. 197 - 202. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2016.2.17192.
23.
Demetradze M.R. Problemy nesootvetstviya sotsiokul'turnoi politiki Rossii protsessov global'noi modernizatsii // Pravo i politika. - 2014. - 1. - C. 23 - 30. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2014.1.9546.
24.
N.P. Koptseva Metodologicheskie vozmozhnosti sotsial'noi (kul'turnoi) antropologii dlya sovremennykh kul'turnykh issledovanii // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2012. - 10. - C. 9 - 18.
25.
A.A. Borisenkov Ponyatie politicheskoi kul'tury // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2012. - 5. - C. 5 - 14.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website