Methodological “Mid-for” from the Perspective of V. Lektorsky’s Non-classics, A. Akhiezer’s Mediation and R. Greenberg’s / A. Rubinstein’s Complementarity Principle

Abstract

This article is devoted to the analysis of the methodological “middle” from the perspective of research by V.A. Lektorsky, M.M. Bakhtin, A.S. Akhiezer and R.S. Grinberg / A.J. Rubinstein. Why they? Because in their complementarity, they significantly approached the answer to the main question of the researchers of the “middle”: how is possible a social mechanism in Russian culture, which contains the potential to overcome the split between the historically formed Rus­sian culture (veche, authoritarian sobornost, rejecting personality, through itself forming a type of Russian power) and society (ideally civil, personal, through it­self shaping social needs)? A scientific discussion on this topic today is possible through the Lectorsky’s theory of non-classical epistemology and its social spec­ification – the M.M. Bakhtin’s principle “I am for the other from the point of view of the other”, “the other for me from my point of view”, the search for the third meaning (mediation) by Akhiezer as an alternative to Manichaean thinking and the Greenberg’s / Rubinstein’s concept of economic sociodynamics (CES). The concept of “mid-for” is used for the first time – the idea of the subjectivity of the “sphere between” culture and society, aimed at developing both poles through developing oneself as the basis for this development.