“Resistance to Theory”: “to” vs “of” (On the Crisis of Theoretical Knowledge in the Age of “Flat” Ontologies)

Modern scholarship in the social sciences and humanities is undergoing a deep theoretical and methodological crisis rooted in the loss of its transcendental and value dimensions. The dominance of flat ontologies from the 19th to the 21st centuries has reduced social and anthropological reality to utilitarian needs and pragmatic interests, depriving theoretical thinking of its synthetic and projective capacities. Within such frameworks, theory becomes marginalized, while the humanities turn fragmented and descriptive, losing their power to express a coherent vision of human existence. Drawing on the works of M. Mamardashvili, J.-F. Lyotard, and others, the authors show how the transition from the classical to the post-nonclassical paradigm transformed the subject of knowledge from a gathering and creative agent into a dispersed and horizontal construct. This shift has produced an epistemic environment of dispersion, transgression, and transparency, undermining the metaphysical and futurological potential of theory. Opposing postmodern decentralization and pluralism, the article argues for a new transcendental turn in contemporary thought—one that restores theory as a form of “collecting” thinking capable of integrating diverse layers of experience into a meaningful whole. In this context, the authors introduce the concept of “poliontism” (V. Kutyrev) as a methodological alternative to both reductionist materialism and speculative idealism. The meaning and essence of poliontism lies in the co-evolution of humankind and other forms of being, where human existence is viewed as the foundation and microcosm of all reality in accordance with Nicholas of Cusa’s formula Homo non vult esse nisi homo (“A human does not wish to be anything but human”). Within this framework, the transcendent dimension becomes not a metaphysical abstraction but an active principle of co-evolution among human, cultural, technological, and natural worlds. Tracing the progress of theoretical consciousness from classical rationalism to posthumanist dispersion, the authors demonstrate that the decline of theory is contingent upon the loss of its transcendental grounding. Restoring this foundation means rethinking theory as both an intellectual and existential responsibility—a practice of self-transcendence enabling humanity to overcome the crisis of “flat ontologies” and reclaim the strategic role of knowledge in shaping the future. The transcendental turn and the concept of poliontism thus mark a possible renewal in philosophy and the humanities, reviving theory as both a way of understanding and a mode of being.