The dynamics of philosophical rationality and social-historical practice

Philosophy in its history in many ways anticipates classical, nonclassical, and postnonclassical types of scientific rationality. : Behind the nonclassical and classical types it is possible to see something more than variants of science. These types correspond to certain styles of human thinking in general and certain worldview positions in particular. The analysis of the main issue of worldview reveals the evolution of the human’s attitude to the world, which is examined in the paper using the concepts of V.S. Stepin, G.S. Batishchev, M.M. Prokhorov, V.V. Kizima, M.G. Zelentsova, and V.A. Kutyrev as examples. This evolution is expressed in the dynamics of philosophical thought. In its historical development, the world philosophy forms the main spiral line of development, manifesting itself in the forms of classical, non-classical, and postnonclassical philosophical thinking. The first of them implies a monologue of the world, the second one - a monologue of the human, and the third one - a dialogue between them. Since this dialogue takes place with the leading role of the human, postnonclassical philosophy is anthropocentric. It has an integrative character since it includes classical and nonclassical rationality as its subordinate moments. The condition for success of practical activity is the application of a particular historical type of rationality to the relevant type of systems: classical rationality - to simple systems, nonclassical rationality - to complex self-regulating systems, postnonclassical rationality - to complex self-developing systems. Postnonclassical thinking assumes a deeply personal and practically oriented position of the cognizer. Using the problem of the interformational transition from capitalism to postcapitalism as an example, the paper examines the peculiarities of practical application of postnonclassical thinking to society as a complex, self-developing system. Classical-type thinking, characteristic of Leninism, has conditioned the current failure of the interformational transition. The postnonclassical understanding of the latter consists not in following an externally imposed social model, but in the free self-activity of social subjects.