Educational Policies of Writing and Reading (A commentary on D.G. Ryndin’s article “Merab Mamardashvili: event of thought and pedagogic practice”)

The paper contains an “asymmetric commentary” on a philosophical text by means of its subsequent placing in the educational contexts. The first of them is related to an explication of the cultural mission of a pedagogical project suggested by the article. The second one is aimed at the analysis of the pedagogical action of the text determined by the writing/reading samples placed in it. The third one performs the function of a counter-text problematizing a pedagogical program of the article being commented. The exhaustion of orientation to symbolic identification with invariant symbols of culture is substantiated. Educational transformation is connected with overcoming the methodological individualism. Education is transformed into a subject of public collaboration. The emphasis in collective work has to be placed not on establishment of the coordinated definition situation, but on the conflict of its interpretations, collision of practical positions and detection of qualitatively various educational prospects. The commentary by means of the trial-and-error method also researches a possibility of building a demonstrative description able to cause dereification effects in the writing/reading processes. It is supposed that deconstructive writing can become a major element of students’ academic competence in the process of university training.

1. Ryndin, D.G. (2019). [Merab Mamardashvili: Event of Thought and Pedagogic Practice]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. No. 1, pp. 104-118. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

2. Polonnikov, A.A. (2010). [Mamardashvili’s “Lectures on Proust”: Methodical Projection]. In: Akademicheskaya lektsiya: prepodavanie i issledovanie [Academic Lecture: Teaching and Research]. Minsk: Belarusian State Univ. Publ. 280 p. (In Russ.)

3. Zakharenko, E.N., Pichugina, T.A. (1996). Slovar’ inostrannykh slov [Dictionary of Foreign Words]. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk Publ. 608 p. (In Russ.)

4. Shilkov, Yu.M. (1999). [To Commentary Apology, or On the Justification of the Postmodern Discourse Rationality]. In: Nauchnaya konferentsiya “Nauchnaya ratsional’nost’ i struktury povsednevnosti” [Scientific Rationality and the Structure of Everyday Life: Sci. Conf., St. Petersburg, Nov 22-23, 1999]. St. Petersburg: SPSU Publ., pp. 21-24. (In Russ.)

5. Smith, B. (2000). [To the Non-transferability of German Philosophy]. Trans. from English. Sotsiologos [Sociologos]. No. 5-6, pp. 124-139. (In Russ.)

6. Shchittsova, T. (2000). [The Phenomenon of Education and the Science of Education in the Work of Fink. Preface to the Publication]. Topos [Topos]. No. 5-6, pp. 38-40. (In Russ.)

7. Ortega y Gasset, J. (1997). Selected Works. Trans. from Spanish. Moscow: Ves’ mir Publ., 704 p. (In Russ.)

8. Ankersmit, F.R. (2003). Narrative Logic. Semantic Analysis of the Language of Historians. Trans. from English. Moscow: Ideya Press, 360 p. (In Russ.)

9. Habermas, J. (2003). Philosophical Discourse on Modernity. Trans. from German. Moscow: Ves’ mir Publ., 416 p. (In Russ.)

10. Husserl, E.G.A. (1999). Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. First Book. Trans. from German. Moscow: Dom intellektual’noi knigi Publ., 336 p. (In Russ.)

11. Sapunov, M.B., Polonnikov, A.A. (2018). [Academic Subject Problem: Epistemological Crisis and Its Overcoming]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. Vol. 27. No. 12, pp. 144-157. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).

12. Klus-Stańska, D. (2016). [When Words Lead Astray. A Brief Thing about the Trap of Polish Methodology]. Problemy wczesnej edukacji [Problems of Early Education]. No. 2 (33), pp. 9-22. (In Polish, abstract in Eng.)

13. Scholes, R. (1985). Textual Power. Literary Theory and the Teaching of English. London: Yale University Press, 176 p.

14. Szkudlarek, T. (2009). Wiedza i wolność w pedagogice amerykańskiego postmodernismu [Knowledge and Freedom in the Pedagogy of American Postmodernism]. Krakow: Impuls Publ., 246 p. (In Polish)

15. Kant, I. (1995). Works in Six Volumes. Vol. 4. Part 1. Trans. from German. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., 544 p. (In Russ.)

16. Schütz, A. (2004). Selected Works: World Glowing with Sense. Trans. from German and English. Moscow: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklopediya Publ., 1056 p. (In Russ.)

17. Lyotard J.-F. (1998). La condition postmoderne [The Postmodern Condition]. Trans. from French. Moscow: Aleteiya; St. Petersburg: Institut sotsiologicheskikh issledovanii Publ., 231 p. (In Russ.)

18. Bakhtin, M.M. (2003). Sobranie sochinenii v 7 t. T. 1. Filosofskaya estetika 20-kh godov [Collected Works in 7 vol. Vol. 1. Philosophical Aesthetics of the 20s.]. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury Publ., 956 p. (In Russ.)

19. Palonnikau, A.A., Karol, D.Yu., Korchalova, N.D. (2018). Izmenenie diskursivnoi politiki sub”ekta v universitetskom obrazovanii [Change in the Discursive Policy of the Subject in University Education]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya = Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. No. 42, pp. 166-178. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)