Author:
Popov Evgeniy Aleksandrovich
Abstract
In the article, the subject of the study is art. Some problematic points in the conceptualization of this phenomenon in modern science are considered, the available empirical research is evaluated, as well as the interdisciplinary perspective of the study of the phenomenon of art. The problem discussed in the article is the objectification of art as an independent phenomenon, and not only as a "form of social consciousness". The possibilities of such objectification can bring scientists closer to understanding the importance of art for self-expression, human improvement, and survival in a modern post-industrial society. To solve this problem, some results of the well-known monitoring of changes in value structures are used – the World Values Survey, which contains data on value transformations in cross-country comparison. This study has been conducted for about 30 years and provides a broad understanding of the relevant changes. The research methodology is based on interdisciplinary, axiological and systemic approaches, the concept of "centralization" of values is used as a new perspective of the study. The scientific novelty of the study in general and its main provisions in particular boils down to the following: (1) the need to understand art from the point of view of not a form of public consciousness, but as a value included in various value systems is shown the structure of human existence; (2) based on the materials of the World Values Survey, the position of the value of art in the system of values of self-expression and values of self-survival is analyzed (according to R. Inglehart); (3) from the point of view of value transformations or changes occurring in the hierarchies of values, the "position" of art has been revealed, consisting in balancing (harmonizing) "intellectual values", which include art. The main result is as follows: art as a value is not subject to transformation and crisis, according to the results of the World Values Survey
Reference24 articles.
1. Bakhtin M.M. Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva. M.: Iskusstvo, 1979. 423 s.
2. Bembel' I. V poiskakh metoda. K voprosu krizisa arkhitekturovedeniya // Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Iskusstvovedenie. 2020. T. 10. № 2 (2020). S. 323-339. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu15.2020.208
3. Burd'e P. Universitetskaya doksa i tvorchestvo: protiv skholasticheskikh delenii // Socio-Logos'96. Al'manakh Rossiisko-Frantsuzskogo tsentra sotsiologicheskikh issledovanii Instituta sotsiologii RAN. M.: Socio-Logos, 1996. S. 8-31. URL:http://bourdieu.name/content/universitetskaja-doksa-i-tvorchestvo-protiv-sholasticheskih-delenij (data obrashcheniya 23.04.2024).
4. Veber M. Nauka kak prizvanie i professiya // Veber M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya. M.: Progress, 1990. S. 707-735.
5. Volkov A. D., Aver'yanov A. O., Roslyakova N. A., Tishkov S. V. Izmerenie sotsiokul'turnykh kharakteristik po shesti pokazatelyam modeli Khofstede: aprobatsiya instrumentariya dlya rascheta znachenii na individual'nom urovne // Vestnik Instituta sotsiologii. 2024. T. 15. № 1. S. 43-69. DOI: 10.19181/vis.2024.15.1.4