Humanitarian Knowledge at the Entrepreneurial University: Strategies of «Justification»
( Pp. 164-177)
More about authors
Binkovskaya Larisa N.
senior lecturer at the Department of Design of Architectural Environment
Belgorod State Technological University named after V.G. Shukhov
Belgorod, Russian Federation Maltsev Konstantin G. Dr. Sci. (Philos.), Professor; Professor at the Department of Theory and Methodology of Science
Belgorod State Technological University named after V.G. Shukhov
Belgorod, Russian Federation Maltseva Anna V. Cand. Sci. (Polit.); associate professor at the Department of Theory and Methodology of Science
Belgorod State Technological University named after V.G. Shukhov
Belgorod, Russian Federation
Belgorod State Technological University named after V.G. Shukhov
Belgorod, Russian Federation Maltsev Konstantin G. Dr. Sci. (Philos.), Professor; Professor at the Department of Theory and Methodology of Science
Belgorod State Technological University named after V.G. Shukhov
Belgorod, Russian Federation Maltseva Anna V. Cand. Sci. (Polit.); associate professor at the Department of Theory and Methodology of Science
Belgorod State Technological University named after V.G. Shukhov
Belgorod, Russian Federation
Abstract:
Humanitarian knowledge and “liberal education” have been a problem for the modern innovative/entrepreneurial university as a commercial firm for the last fifty years: “impact” as an imperative of the university’s public discourse in liberal democracies and university policy apparently contradicts the statements about the “self-worth” or “uselessness” of humanitarian knowledge. The purpose of the article is to consider the main directions of the “justification” of the “humanitarian component” of the university, the ways of its politicization (the term U. Beck): appeals to values (culture), to the public good, civic education, to the methodological function of philosophy and the humanities, undertaken in this regard. The absence of grounds for the above-mentioned methods of politicization to matter is demonstrated: both in connection with their own inconsistency of such values, and as an argument for the prevailing public discourse of the university. It is concluded that the prevailing liberal interpretation of humanitarian knowledge necessarily provides for its transformation into a product whose price is determined by the market. The actual “problem situation” is not related to the “nature of humanitarian knowledge”, but to the “struggle for status”, that is, it is a question of power and prestige in connection with their redistribution in an entrepreneurial university as a commercial company.
How to Cite:
Binkovskaya L.N., Maltsev K.G., Maltseva A.V., (2022), HUMANITARIAN KNOWLEDGE AT THE ENTREPRENEURIAL UNIVERSITY: STRATEGIES OF «JUSTIFICATION». Sociopolitical Sciences, 2: 164-177. DOI: 10.33693/2223-0092-2022-12-2-164-177
Reference list:
Agamben J. Kingdom and glory. To the theological genealogy of economics and management. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute; Faculty of Liberal Arts and Sciences of St. Petersburg State University, 2018. 552 p.
Ankersmith F.R. Aesthetic policy. Political philosophy beyond fact and value. Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics, 2014. 432 p.
Alaverdyan A.L., Binkovskaya L.N., Maltsev K.G. “Cultural nation” and “University of Culture”: The experience of interpreting the onto political basis of unity. Society: Politics, Economics, Law. 2021. No. 6 (95). Pp. 13-25. (In Rus.)
Beck U. What is globalization. Moscow: Progress-Tradition, 2001. 304 p.
Binkovskaya L.N., Maltsev K.G. Modern culture as cultural policy: M. Heidegger on culture as a “phenomenon of modernity”. Eurasian Legal Journal. 2021. No. 3 (154). Pp. 464-470. (In Rus.)
Binkovskaya L.N., Maltsev K.G. The strange “death of the university”: The experience of philosophical interpretation. Society: Philosophy, History, Culture. 2021. No. 4 (84). Pp. 21-26. (In Rus.)
Weber M. Basic sociological concepts. In: Weber M. Selected works. Moscow: Progress, 1990. Pp. 602-643.
Grinfeld L. Nationalism. Five paths to modernity. Moscow: PER SE, 2012. 528 p.
Humboldt V. Von. On the internal and external organization of higher scientific institutions in Berlin. University Management: Practice and Analysis. 1998. No. 3 (6). P. 28. (In Rus.)
Debor G. Performance society. Moscow: Logos, 2000. 184 p.
Diltey V. Collected works in 6 volumes. Vol. 1. Introduction to the sciences of the spirit. Moscow: House of Intellectual Books, 2000. 762 p.
Zhdanova I.V., Maltsev K.G. “Self-justification of philosophy”: “Interdisciplinarity” as a way to “integrate” into the “disciplinary structure” of modern science. Intelligence. Innovation. Investment. 2020. No. 5. Pp. 126-133. (In Rus.)
Eagleton T. The slow death of the University. Council of Rectors, 2015. No. 4. Pp. 19-26. (In Rus.)
Kant I. Dispute of faculties. In: Kant I. Essays in 8 volumes. Vol. 7. Moscow: Choro, 1994. Pp. 57-136.
Clark B.R. The creation of entrepreneurial universities: organizational directions of transformation. Moscow: Publishing House of the State University Higher School of Economics, 2011. 240 p.
Collini S. Why are universities needed? Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics, 2016. 264 p.
Liotar J.-F. The state of postmodernity. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Institute of Experimental Sociology; Aleteya, 1998. 160 p.
Lomako L.L., Maltsev K.G. The Constructivist paradigm in the study of the nation, nationalism, ethno-national conflict: some critical remarks. Eurasian Law Journal. 2020a. No. 8 (147). Pp. 430-434. (In Rus.)
Lomako L.L., Maltsev K.G. Modernist and constructivist ways of conceptualizing the nation and nationalism: Comparative analysis. Socio-Humanitarian Knowledge. 2020b. No. 3. Pp. 273-291. (In Rus.)
Maltsev K.G., Alaverdyan A.L. Modern political philosophy and the “myth of the nation” by K. Hubner. Eurasian Legal Journal. 2020. No. 10 (149). Pp. 472-476. (In Rus.)
Maltsev K.G., Maltseva A.V. “Human capital” as a concept of biopolitics: The experience of philosophical interpretation. Proceedings of the Southwestern State University. Series: Economics. Sociology. Management. 2020a. Vol. 10. No. 5. Pp. 242-252. (In Rus.)
Maltsev K.G., Maltseva A.V. Digitalization and “digital fetishism”: Foresight in the existential-historical thinking of M. Heidegger. Person. Culture. Education. 2020b. No. 4 (38). Pp. 46-58. (In Rus.)
Nussbaum M. Not for profit: Why democracy needs humanities. Moscow: Publishing House of Higher School of Economics, 2014. 182 p.
Newman J.G. The idea of a university. Minsk: BSU, 2006 208 p.
Reading B. University in ruins. Moscow: Publishing House of the State University Higher School of Economics, 2010. 299 p.
Rikkert G. Boundaries of natural science education of concepts. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1997. 532 p.
Ritzer J. McDonaldization of society 5. Moscow: Praxis, 2011. 592 p.
Urri J. Mobility. Moscow: Praxis, 2012. 576 p.
Fichte I.G. Speeches to the German nation. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2009. 350 p.
Fukuyama F. The end of history and the last man. Moscow: ACT; Polygraphizdat, 2010. 588 p.
Habermas Yu. Moral consciousness and communicative action. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2001. 382 p.
Heidegger M. Reflections II-VI (Black notebooks 1931-1938). Moscow: Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, 2016. 584 p.
Heidegger M. Reflections VII-XI (Black notebooks 1938-1939). Moscow: Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, 2018. 528 p.
Heidegger M. Reflections XII-XV (Black notebooks 1939-1941). Moscow: Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, 2020. 344 p.
Schmitt K. The spiritual and historical state of modern parliamentarism. In: Schmitt K. The concept of political. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2016a. Pp. 93-170.
Schmitt K. Political theology In: Schmitt K. The concept of the political. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2016b. Pp. 5-59.
Albrow M. The global age: State and society beyond modernity. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1997. 265 p.
Appadurai A. Modernity at large. Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1996. 244 r.
Featherstone M. Localism, globalizmand cultural. In: Global/local cultural production and the transnational imaginary. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1996. Pp. 46-77.
Frodeman R. Philosophy dedisciplined // Synthese. 2013. Vol. 190. Pp. 1917-1936.
Fuller S. Deviant interdisciplinarity as philosophical practice: Prolegomena to deep intellectual history // Synthese. 2013. Vol. 190 (11). Pp. 1899-1916.
Habermas J . Theory of communicative action. Vol. 1: Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon Press, 1984. 465 r.
Habermas J . Theory of communicative action. Vol. 2: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Transl. by T.A. McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1987. 463 r.
Lasch C. The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectations. New York: Norton, 1979. 296 r.
O Rourke M.. Crowley S.J. Philosophical intervention and cross-disciplinary science: The story of the Toolbox Project // Synthese. 2013. Vol. 190. Pp. 1937-1954.
Robertson R. Globalization: Social theory and global culture. London: SAGE Publication, 1992. 205 r.
Rowls J. Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996. 525 r.
Klein J.T. Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1990. 554 p.
Rossini F.A., Porter A.L. Frameworks for integrating interdisciplinary research // Research Policy. 1979. No. 8. Pp. 70-79.
Ankersmith F.R. Aesthetic policy. Political philosophy beyond fact and value. Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics, 2014. 432 p.
Alaverdyan A.L., Binkovskaya L.N., Maltsev K.G. “Cultural nation” and “University of Culture”: The experience of interpreting the onto political basis of unity. Society: Politics, Economics, Law. 2021. No. 6 (95). Pp. 13-25. (In Rus.)
Beck U. What is globalization. Moscow: Progress-Tradition, 2001. 304 p.
Binkovskaya L.N., Maltsev K.G. Modern culture as cultural policy: M. Heidegger on culture as a “phenomenon of modernity”. Eurasian Legal Journal. 2021. No. 3 (154). Pp. 464-470. (In Rus.)
Binkovskaya L.N., Maltsev K.G. The strange “death of the university”: The experience of philosophical interpretation. Society: Philosophy, History, Culture. 2021. No. 4 (84). Pp. 21-26. (In Rus.)
Weber M. Basic sociological concepts. In: Weber M. Selected works. Moscow: Progress, 1990. Pp. 602-643.
Grinfeld L. Nationalism. Five paths to modernity. Moscow: PER SE, 2012. 528 p.
Humboldt V. Von. On the internal and external organization of higher scientific institutions in Berlin. University Management: Practice and Analysis. 1998. No. 3 (6). P. 28. (In Rus.)
Debor G. Performance society. Moscow: Logos, 2000. 184 p.
Diltey V. Collected works in 6 volumes. Vol. 1. Introduction to the sciences of the spirit. Moscow: House of Intellectual Books, 2000. 762 p.
Zhdanova I.V., Maltsev K.G. “Self-justification of philosophy”: “Interdisciplinarity” as a way to “integrate” into the “disciplinary structure” of modern science. Intelligence. Innovation. Investment. 2020. No. 5. Pp. 126-133. (In Rus.)
Eagleton T. The slow death of the University. Council of Rectors, 2015. No. 4. Pp. 19-26. (In Rus.)
Kant I. Dispute of faculties. In: Kant I. Essays in 8 volumes. Vol. 7. Moscow: Choro, 1994. Pp. 57-136.
Clark B.R. The creation of entrepreneurial universities: organizational directions of transformation. Moscow: Publishing House of the State University Higher School of Economics, 2011. 240 p.
Collini S. Why are universities needed? Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics, 2016. 264 p.
Liotar J.-F. The state of postmodernity. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Institute of Experimental Sociology; Aleteya, 1998. 160 p.
Lomako L.L., Maltsev K.G. The Constructivist paradigm in the study of the nation, nationalism, ethno-national conflict: some critical remarks. Eurasian Law Journal. 2020a. No. 8 (147). Pp. 430-434. (In Rus.)
Lomako L.L., Maltsev K.G. Modernist and constructivist ways of conceptualizing the nation and nationalism: Comparative analysis. Socio-Humanitarian Knowledge. 2020b. No. 3. Pp. 273-291. (In Rus.)
Maltsev K.G., Alaverdyan A.L. Modern political philosophy and the “myth of the nation” by K. Hubner. Eurasian Legal Journal. 2020. No. 10 (149). Pp. 472-476. (In Rus.)
Maltsev K.G., Maltseva A.V. “Human capital” as a concept of biopolitics: The experience of philosophical interpretation. Proceedings of the Southwestern State University. Series: Economics. Sociology. Management. 2020a. Vol. 10. No. 5. Pp. 242-252. (In Rus.)
Maltsev K.G., Maltseva A.V. Digitalization and “digital fetishism”: Foresight in the existential-historical thinking of M. Heidegger. Person. Culture. Education. 2020b. No. 4 (38). Pp. 46-58. (In Rus.)
Nussbaum M. Not for profit: Why democracy needs humanities. Moscow: Publishing House of Higher School of Economics, 2014. 182 p.
Newman J.G. The idea of a university. Minsk: BSU, 2006 208 p.
Reading B. University in ruins. Moscow: Publishing House of the State University Higher School of Economics, 2010. 299 p.
Rikkert G. Boundaries of natural science education of concepts. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1997. 532 p.
Ritzer J. McDonaldization of society 5. Moscow: Praxis, 2011. 592 p.
Urri J. Mobility. Moscow: Praxis, 2012. 576 p.
Fichte I.G. Speeches to the German nation. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2009. 350 p.
Fukuyama F. The end of history and the last man. Moscow: ACT; Polygraphizdat, 2010. 588 p.
Habermas Yu. Moral consciousness and communicative action. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2001. 382 p.
Heidegger M. Reflections II-VI (Black notebooks 1931-1938). Moscow: Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, 2016. 584 p.
Heidegger M. Reflections VII-XI (Black notebooks 1938-1939). Moscow: Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, 2018. 528 p.
Heidegger M. Reflections XII-XV (Black notebooks 1939-1941). Moscow: Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, 2020. 344 p.
Schmitt K. The spiritual and historical state of modern parliamentarism. In: Schmitt K. The concept of political. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2016a. Pp. 93-170.
Schmitt K. Political theology In: Schmitt K. The concept of the political. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2016b. Pp. 5-59.
Albrow M. The global age: State and society beyond modernity. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1997. 265 p.
Appadurai A. Modernity at large. Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1996. 244 r.
Featherstone M. Localism, globalizmand cultural. In: Global/local cultural production and the transnational imaginary. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1996. Pp. 46-77.
Frodeman R. Philosophy dedisciplined // Synthese. 2013. Vol. 190. Pp. 1917-1936.
Fuller S. Deviant interdisciplinarity as philosophical practice: Prolegomena to deep intellectual history // Synthese. 2013. Vol. 190 (11). Pp. 1899-1916.
Habermas J . Theory of communicative action. Vol. 1: Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon Press, 1984. 465 r.
Habermas J . Theory of communicative action. Vol. 2: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Transl. by T.A. McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1987. 463 r.
Lasch C. The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectations. New York: Norton, 1979. 296 r.
O Rourke M.. Crowley S.J. Philosophical intervention and cross-disciplinary science: The story of the Toolbox Project // Synthese. 2013. Vol. 190. Pp. 1937-1954.
Robertson R. Globalization: Social theory and global culture. London: SAGE Publication, 1992. 205 r.
Rowls J. Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996. 525 r.
Klein J.T. Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1990. 554 p.
Rossini F.A., Porter A.L. Frameworks for integrating interdisciplinary research // Research Policy. 1979. No. 8. Pp. 70-79.
Keywords:
humanitarian knowledge, liberal education, entrepreneurial university, politicization, discourse of excellence, public discourse of the university, human capital.
