This book offers a complete survey of contemporary Soviet theory of knowledge. It is by no means meant to replace De Vries' excellent treatise on the same subject. Since De Vries depended mainly on the 'classics of Marxism' and the few contemporary Soviet works which were available in German translation, his account is at best an in troduction to the contemporary period. In a sense this book is com plementary to his: he presents the doctrines of the classics and criticizes them, this book recounts what came after and what is going on now. Epistemology and theory of knowledge are taken here as equivalent terms, representing the Soviet gnose%gija and teorija poznanija. No attempt to justify the existence of such a philosophical discipline will be attempted here. Even outside of this question of the legitimacy of epistemo logy, it is not easy to delimit the domain of its purvey. We have, therefore, taken it in a wider rather than narrow sense. This means that some ques tions of logic and psychology have been taken up - to the extent that they overlap with the field of philosophical consideration of knowledge.
When the Bolsheviks seized power in 1917, they set themselves the task of building socialism in the vast landscape of the former Russian Empire, a territory populated by hundreds of different peoples belonging to a multitude of linguistic, religious, and ethnic groups. Before 1917, the Bolsheviks had called for the national self-determination of all peoples and had condemned all forms of colonization as exploitative. After attaining power, however, they began to express concern that it would not be possible for Soviet Russia to survive without the cotton of Turkestan and the oil of the Caucasus. In an effort to reconcile their anti-imperialist position with their desire to hold on to as much territory as possible, the Bolsheviks integrated the national idea into the administrative-territorial structure of the new Soviet state. In Empire of Nations, Francine Hirsch examines the ways in which former imperial ethnographers and local elites provided the Bolsheviks with ethnographic knowledge that shaped the very formation of the new Soviet Union. The ethnographers—who drew inspiration from the Western European colonial context—produced all-union censuses, assisted government commissions charged with delimiting the USSR's internal borders, led expeditions to study "the human being as a productive force," and created ethnographic exhibits about the "Peoples of the USSR." In the 1930s, they would lead the Soviet campaign against Nazi race theories . Hirsch illuminates the pervasive tension between the colonial-economic and ethnographic definitions of Soviet territory; this tension informed Soviet social, economic, and administrative structures. A major contribution to the history of Russia and the Soviet Union, Empire of Nations also offers new insights into the connection between ethnography and empire.
Soviet philosophy can no longer be ignored by any serious student of contemporary thought. It is the work of academic philosophers who, on the whole, are neither more nor less competent than their colleagues in the free world. They have, however, inherited a reputation for the dogmatic repetip. on of superannuated doctrines. This reputation, en gendered by poor work under political pressure, was justified until about the mid-fifties. However, in the mid-sixties, when declining pressures make for the toleration of a wider scale of qualified opinion, it is no longer that. The present survey of Soviet thought in the mid-sixties, comprising papers by Western specialists in its major domains, gives an up-to-date account of an impressive field of philosophical endeavor which, awakened from dogmap'c slumbers, rapidly gains in interest and encourages hopes of becoming a valuable component in the vast complex of contemporary philosophy. The studies on Soviet logic and atheism have originally appeared in a special issue of Inquiry (Vol. 9,1) devoted to philosophy in Eastern Europe and edited by the present writer on behalf of Professor Arne Naess. The other papers of this volume are reprinted from Studies in Soviet Thought, the only Western philosophical review entirely dedicated to systematic studies in this field. The necessary permissions by editors and publishers have been granted and are gratefully acknowledged. ER VIN LASZLO v CONTENTS INTRODUCTION J. M.
Originally published in 1975, this title sets out to show us the differences between Soviet and other ways of thinking about nature, man, and society. The basic factor distinguishing Soviet psychology is that it views phenomena from the perspective of a highly articulated body of theoretical assumptions, and rejects the inductive ‘eclecticism’ of Western psychology. The theoretical framework within which Soviet psychology functions is the product of a distinctive socio-political and cultural development in Russia profoundly shaped by the institutions of autocracy and Orthodox religion, and the economic system of serfdom, and the radical revolt which grew up in opposition to this and advocated materialism, secularism, and atheism. This radical philosophic tradition in Russia, best represented by the writings of Chernishevski, fused with the doctrines of Marxism and the new science of behaviour developed by Sechenov and Pavlov to create the theoretical framework of Soviet psychology. The book also analyses the discussions, controversies, and decrees which are at the root of the contemporary science of behaviour in the Soviet Union, and points to the impressive body of empirical knowledge which has arisen. Soviet Psychology is unique in presenting Soviet psychology from an ‘inside’ point of view, and in making us appreciate the strongly theoretical stance of Soviet psychology which Professor McLeish claims is unlikely to be much influenced by the new atmosphere of détente.
Soviet Samizdat traces the emergence and development of samizdat, one of the most significant and distinctive phenomena of the late Soviet era, as an uncensored system for making and sharing texts. Based on extensive research of the underground journals, bulletins, art folios and other periodicals produced in the Soviet Union from the mid-1950s to the mid-1980s, Ann Komaromi analyzes the role of samizdat in fostering new forms of imagined community among Soviet citizens. Dissidence has been dismissed as an elite phenomenon or as insignificant because it had little demonstrable impact on the Soviet regime. Komaromi challenges these views and demonstrates that the kind of imagination about self and community made possible by samizdat could be a powerful social force. She explains why participants in samizdat culture so often sought to divide "political" from "cultural" samizdat. Her study provides a controversial umbrella definition for all forms of samizdat in terms of truth-telling, arguing that the act is experienced as transformative by Soviet authors and readers. This argument will challenge scholars in the field to respond to contentions that go against the grain of both anthropological and postmodern accounts. Komaromi's combination of literary analysis, historical research, and sociological theory makes sense of the phenomenon of samizdat for readers today. Soviet Samizdat shows that samizdat was not simply a tool of opposition to a defunct regime. Instead, samizdat fostered informal communities of knowledge that foreshadowed a similar phenomenon of alternative perspectives challenging the authority of institutions around the world today.
The opening of the former Soviet Union to the West has provided an opportunity to describe Russian human factors/ergonomics and to compare American theories and methods with it. Although this book is principally dedicated to describing the theory of activity as it applies to issues of design and training, it is also offered to a general audience of psychologists and interested lay readers. This theory studies the goal-directed behavior of man and attempts to integrate the cognitive, motivational, and behavioral aspects of activity into a holistic system. Such fundamental notions as goal, action, and self-regulation are described and analyzed from totally different theoretical points of view. This is the first comprehensive, systematic description of the theory of activity in the English language. Existing attempts to translate the theory of activity into English suffer from certain limitations. Among them, the theory of activity -- considered one of the more important accomplishments of Soviet psychological science -- has an extensive history dating back to the work of Vygotsky and his students. Subsequent development of the theory by other well-known Soviet psychologists and psychophysiologists took place within different schools with some significant differences. In the former Soviet Union, psychological theory could not be advanced unconnected to Marxist-Leninist ideology. Accordingly, theoretical formulations were subject to their own version of "political correctness." Books published in this field were addressed only to other scientists with backgrounds in the field. Moreover, the translation of the technical terms in Russian psychology frequently resist translation in the absence of the context of the debates in which they were being used. Thus, simple translation of books in this field as they were written in a specialized and politicized environment for Russian audiences is really not a particularly sensible or worthwhile undertaking. This book is addressed in the first instance to Western psychologists. It compares, among other things, analyses of work from the former Soviet Union with the work from the West. Applications of activity theory to design and learning were paramount in the Soviet Union. Using their own theoretical perspective, the authors provide a comparative analysis of the various schools working in activity theory. They hope that this book may facilitate the exchange of ideas between Russian psychological scientists and Western psychologists working in ergonomics, human factors, industrial/organizational psychology, education, learning, and related areas where the theory of activity may find general application. This book's authors attempt to provide a contribution not only to science but also to history. Western researchers have strongly influenced Russian work, but because of negative political pressure in the former USSR, the flow of concepts was one-sided. Russian ergonomists received so much from American and Western sources that it is now important to give something back. Despite the considerable similarity between Russian and American theories and methods, the special "spin" the former put on their work may stimulate new thinking on the part of their American colleagues.
He shows direct and inverse links between foundations of science and new theories and empirical facts evolved from those, how among many potentially possible histories of science a culture selects just those directions which become a real history of science. The author analyses mechanisms of the generation of scientific theories and shows that those are changed in the process of historical development of science. He displays three historical types of scientific rationality (classical, non-classical and post-non-classical, which appears in modern science) and shows features of their coexistence and interplay. It is shown that along with the emerging of post-non-classical rationality science increases the sphere of its worldview applications. Science begins to correlate not only with the basic values of technogenic civilization but also with some values and patterns of traditional cultures.
This book offers a complete survey of contemporary Soviet theory of knowledge. It is by no means meant to replace De Vries' excellent treatise on the same subject. Since De Vries depended mainly on the 'classics of Marxism' and the few contemporary Soviet works which were available in German translation, his account is at best an in troduction to the contemporary period. In a sense this book is com plementary to his: he presents the doctrines of the classics and criticizes them, this book recounts what came after and what is going on now. Epistemology and theory of knowledge are taken here as equivalent terms, representing the Soviet gnose%gija and teorija poznanija. No attempt to justify the existence of such a philosophical discipline will be attempted here. Even outside of this question of the legitimacy of epistemo logy, it is not easy to delimit the domain of its purvey. We have, therefore, taken it in a wider rather than narrow sense. This means that some ques tions of logic and psychology have been taken up - to the extent that they overlap with the field of philosophical consideration of knowledge.
In Dialectics of the Ideal: Evald Ilyenkov and Creative Soviet Marxism Levant and Oittinen provide a window into the subterranean tradition of ‘creative’ Soviet Marxism, which developed on the margins of the Soviet academe and remains largely outside the orbit of contemporary theory in the West. With his ‘activity approach’, E.V. Ilyenkov, its principal figure in the post-Stalin period, makes a substantial contribution toward an anti-reductionist Marxist theory of the subject, which should be of interest to contemporary theorists who seek to avoid economic and cultural reductionism as well as the malaise of postmodern relativism. This volume features Levant’s translation of Ilyenkov’s Dialectics of the Ideal (2009), which remained unpublished until thirty years after the author’s tragic suicide in 1979. Contributors include: Evald Ilyenkov, Tarja Knuuttila, Alex Levant, Andrey Maidansky, Vesa Oittinen, Paula Rauhala, and Birger Siebert.
The collapse of communism was one of the most defining moments of the twentieth century. This Very Short Introduction examines the history behind the political, economic, and social structures of communism as an ideology.
