Project of Libertarianism in the Conceptual Interpretation of Postmodernity: Microcosm VS Macrocosm and the “Inbetween Man”
Loading...
Date
2021
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Khachatur Abovian Armenian State Pedagogical University, Yerevan, RA
Abstract
EN: The ambivalence of meanings in the postmodern theories accentuates the hermeneutic interpretation of concepts: the new “cosmic meanings” have changed the world picture i n q uite a r evolutionary way. Though the views on postmodernism are contradictory, of principle importance is the idea that there are some valid “inventions”, which have given meaning to this term; in politics, it is the rise of neoliberalism and libertarianism. Thus, the paper aims to research the interrelation of the “inner” logic of the “free individual”, his/her micro-and macrocosm in libertarianism with the external political transformations and ideological discourses of postmodernity. The research results show that science and arts allow focusing on the interpretation of the consequences of those phenomena, which are going on at the level of the “political unconscious”. The theorists insist on rethinking the categories of libertarianism: the included concepts are challenging to combine in the principle of the domination of liberty. The focus on libertarianism stipulates the novelty of the research as the postmodern feature, which provides validity to the term “late postmodernism”. The new cosmology of the third millennium gives the possibility to use the term “cosmological postmodernism”.
Description
T. Vlasova: ORCID 0000-0001-5040-5733; O. Pshinko: ORCID 0000-0002-1598-2970; S. Bondarchuk: ORCID 0000-0003-1674-8243; R. Veprytskyi: ORCID 0000-0003-2406-1943
Keywords
hermeneutics, conceptual ambivalence, cosmological postmodernism, individuation, liberty, reconceptualization, КФП, КАПЗБМ
Citation
Vlasova T., Pshinko O., Bondarchuk S., Veprytskyi R. Project of Libertarianism in the Conceptual Interpretation of Postmodernity: Microcosm VS Macrocosm and the “Inbetween Man”. Wisdom. 2021. Vol. 19, Iss. 3. P. 194–202. DOI: 10.24234/wisdom.v19i3.503.