UDC

101.1:316

Authors

Tat’yana V. Fanenshtil’
Polzunov Altai State Technical University;
prosp. Lenina 46, Barnaul, 656038, Altayskiy kray, Russian Federation;
e-mail: fanenshtil.t.v@mail.ru

Abstract

This article examines the influence of various postulates and theses on the socio-philosophical analysis of everyday life and of its characteristics. To reveal the boundaries of the contradictory content of everyday life, the author suggests using paired comparison for the characteristics revealed in the process of applying various interdisciplinary methods. The static and dynamic characteristics of everyday life are compared (F. Braudel’s structural method and A. Schütz’ sociological phenomenology). In this opposition we, from the content core of everyday life, turn to the question of the role of a concrete subject in the reproduction of everyday experience. In the framework of M. Weber’s interpretative sociology and I. Goffman’s social interactionism, this question is problematized here along with the freedom of choice of a concrete subject and the personification limits under the reproduction of everyday experience. In spite of significant steps towards dynamization of everyday experience, when analysing it in its essential definition, we can see a tendency towards structural and static properties. E. Husserl’s philosophical phenomenology, using intersubjectivity for the analysis of everyday life, also supports this relationship. M. de Certeau’s theory of practices and J. Austin’s theory of speech acts, on the contrary, deny contextual dependence of everyday life and claim it to be an invention, a usage. The author of this paper points out that the analysis of everyday life and its characteristics crucially depend on the applied socio-philosophical postulates and theses of related disciplines. Through the analysis of the characteristics of everyday life, this dependence allows us to examine the mutual dialectic conditionality of the processes which reveal the application scope of the above methods in the analysis of daily life and contradictory nature of its content.

Keywords

everyday life, static characteristics of everyday life, dynamic characteristics of everyday life, everyday experience

References

1. Barulin V.S. Osnovy sotsial’no-filosofskoy antropologii [Fundamentals of Socio-Philosophical Anthropology]. Moscow, 2002, pp. 332–367.
   
2. Syrov V.N. Filosofskaya ekspertiza: ot metafory k ponyatiyu [Philosophical Examination: From Metaphor to Concept]. Filosofiya obrazovaniya, 2013, no. 1, pp. 125–137.
   
3. Braudel F. Material’naya tsivilizatsiya, ekonomika i kapitalizm, XV–XVII vv. [Material Civilization, Economy and Capitalism, 15th – 17h Centuries]. Moscow, 1986. Vol. 1. 624 p.
   
4. Schütz A. Smyslovaya struktura povsednevnogo mira: ocherki po fenomenologicheskoy sotsiologii [The Semantic Structure of the Everyday World: Essays on Phenomenological Sociology]. Moscow, 2003. 336 p.
   
5. Goffman I. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston, 1986 (Russ. ed.: Gofman I. Analiz freymov. Esse ob organizatsii povsednevnogo opyta. Moscow, 2003. 752 p.).
   
6. Syrov V.N. O statuse i strukture povsednevnosti (metodologicheskie aspekty) [On the Status and Structure of Everyday Life (Methodological Aspects)]. Lichnost’. Kul’tura. Obshchestvo, 2000, vol. 2, pp. 147–159.
   
7. Husserl E. Izbrannye raboty [Selected Works]. Moscow, 2005. 464 p.
   
8. Austin J. Izbrannoe [Selected Works]. Moscow, 1999. 332 p.
   
9. de Certeau M. L’Invention du Quotidien. Vol. 1. Arts de Faire. Union generale d’editions, 1980 (Russ. ed.: Serto de M. Izobretenie povsednevnosti. 1. Iskusstvo delat’ . St. Petersburg, 2015. 330 p.).
   
10. Heiddegger M. Bytie i vremya [Being and Time]. Moscow, 1997. 452 p.
    
11. Borisov E.V., Ladov V.A., Surovtsev V.A. Yazyk, soznanie, mir. Ocherki komparativnogo analiza fenomenologii i analiticheskoy filosofii [Language, Consciousness, World. Essays on the Comparative Analysis of Phenomenology and Analytical Philosophy]. 2010. Available at: http://huminf.tsu.ru/files/ladov/monography.pdf (accessed 1 September 2016).
    
12. Enns I.A. Osnovaniya i sposoby tematizatsii fenomena intersub”ektivnosti v sovremennoy filosofii [Bases and Methods of Thematization of Intersubjectivity in Contemporary Philosophy]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2008, no. 1, pp. 38–43.