The concept of utility in new european rationalism and empiricism


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The immediacy of the utility problem is determined by the variety of the notion “utility” interpretations. The present research objective – solution of the notional uncertainty of the notion “utility” in the rational and empirical concepts of the modern era. The methodology includes historic reenactment of the notion “utility” within the scope of rationalism and empiricism as well as comparison and collation of these approaches. The result of research is pointing out the definitions of the notion “utility” in the rational and empirical concepts of the modern era. The first (rationalistical) interpretation may be understood as the experimental data combination that includes preparation methods, decision-making and implementation of the decisions, compliant with the forecasting expected impact and achieving practically significant results. The second, the empirical one, deals with the thinking mode, coordinating the work of the conscious mind and feelings, and providing the free-will choice of an acceptable decision in accordance with the certain situation. The results of research presuppose removal of the colliding approaches regarding the notion “utility” interpretation via mutual complementation of the initial rationalism and empiricism fundamentals (reasoning capabilities and experimental data), implemented within the scope of utilitarianism, pragmatism, as well as within the concepts of the new science frontier – the philosophy of technology.

About the authors

Iskender A. Gaparov

Samara National Research University

Author for correspondence.
Email: sarov-1@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4745-9113

Postgraduate Student of the Department of Philosophy

Russian Federation, 34, Moskovskoe Shosse (St.), Samara, 443086, Russian Federation

References

  1. Bacon, F. (1879), The Works of Lord Bacon: With an Introductory Essay, In Two Volumes, vol. II, Reeves and Turner, London, UK.
  2. Descartes, R. (1656), Renati Des Cartes Specimina philosophiae: seu Dissertatio de methodo recte regendae rationis, et veritatis in scientiis investigandae: dioptrice, et meteora, Ex Gallico translata [ab E. de Courcelles], et ab auctore perlecta, variisque in locis emendata. Amstelodami [Amsterdam]: apud Johannem Janssonium.
  3. Berkeley, J. (1978), Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, Works, Moscow, Mysl', Russia.
  4. Bacon, F. (1977), Sochinenija v 4 tomah, vol. 2, Moscow, Mysl', Russia.
  5. Govorun, E.D. (2020), Ethical Alternatives to Homo Economicus (Reflection on S. Bowles’ Book "Moral Economy: Why Good Incentives Are No Substitute for Good Citizens"), Serija: OBSHHESTVO: FILOSOFIJA. ISTORIJA. KUL'TURA, no. 4 (72), pp. 41–45, DOI: https://doi.org/10.24158/fik.2020.4.7.
  6. Dear, P. (2020), What Is the History of Science the History Of?: Early Modern Roots of the Ideology of Modern Science, LOGOS, no. 30 (1), pp. 29–62, DOI: https://doi.org/10.22394/0869-5377-2020-1-29-58.
  7. Descartes, R. (1989), Sochinenija v 2 tomah, vol. I, Moscow, Mysl', Russia.
  8. Dessauer, F. (2017), Dispute about Technology, Izdatel'stvo Samarskoj gumanitarnoj akademii, Samara, Russia.
  9. Leibniz, G.V. (1984), Sochinenija v 4 tomah, vol. 3, Moscow, Mysl', Russia.
  10. Leibniz, G.V. (1982), Sochinenija v 4 tomah, vol. 1, Moscow, Mysl', Russia.
  11. London, J. (2021), Martin Eden, Eksmo, Moscow, Russia.
  12. Locke, J. (1985), Sochinenija v 3 tomah, vol. 1, Mysl', Moscow, Russia.
  13. Merkulova, N.A. (2019), The problem of moral choice in modern European philosophy, Vestnik Vjatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, no. 3 (133), pp. 54–59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.25730/VSU.7606. 19.035.
  14. Nesterov, A.Yu. (2022), Expression and designation in the semiotics of technology: to the question of "useful" interpretation, Analiticheskaja filosofija: traektorii istorii i vektory razvitija: sbornik nauchnyh trudov Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferencii, posvjashhennoj 80-letiju nauchnogo rukovoditelja Instituta filosofii i prava SO RAN V. V. Celishheva, Novosibirsk, 25–26 fevralja 2022, Ed. by A.V. Khlebalin, Novosibirsk, pp. 166–171.
  15. Rand, A. (2010), Atlas Shrugged, Part I, Al'pina Pablisherz, Moscow, Russia.
  16. Rand, A. (2021), Atlas Shrugged, Part III, Al'pina Pablisher, Moscow, Russia.
  17. Sokolov, V.V. (2019), Gottfried Leibniz's Philosophical Synthesis, Editorial URSS, Moscow, Russia.
  18. Sokolova, O.V. (2017), Cartesian doubt as a method ofself-determination of thinking, Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta, Serija: Filosofija. Psihologija. Pedagogika, no. 27 (4), pp. 416–421.
  19. Spinoza, B. (2001), Ethics, AST, Moscow, Russia.
  20. Engelmeyer, P.K. (1913), Technicism, Philosophy of Technology, vol. 1–4, T-vo skoropech. A.A. Levenson, Moscow, Russia.
  21. Hume, D. (1996). An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, Sochinenija v 2 tomah, vol. 2, Mysl', Moscow, Russia.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2022 Gaparov I.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies