Уважаемые коллеги, доброго времени суток! Представляем вам украинское научное издание Sententiae. Журнал имеет третий квартиль, издается в Vinnytsia National Technical University, выходит два раза в год, его SJR за 2019 г. равен 0,139, печатный ISSN 2075-6461, электронный - 2308-8915, предметная область Философия. Вот так выглядит обложка:
Редактором является Олег Хома, контактные данные - sententiae2000@gmail.com, irvc.vntu@gmail.com
Это историко-философский журнал открытого доступа, который был создан исследовательской группой современной философии (Pascalian society) в 2000 году, с 2016 г. индексируется в Scopus. Целью издания является способствование развитию широкого спектра современных подходов, и активное их внедрение в исследовательскую практику, установление высоких стандартов преподавания философии на основе достижений современной истории философии. Ключевым приоритетом является обеспечение эмпирического обоснования историко-философских концепций, основанных на критериях буквальности, исчерпываемости, контекстуальности и учитывающих существующие спекулятивные интерпретации. Жан-Люк Марион первым сформулировал данный набор критериев в 1998 году как основные черты современных исследований философии Декарта. Издание рассматривает данные принципы как методологическую основу любого обоснованного метода исследования в истории философии. Публикуя материалы по всем историко-философским темам, особое внимание уделяется исследованиям в области терминологии, вопросам философского перевода и непереводимости, рукописным исследованиям (в том числе рукописному наследию профессоров Киево-Могилянской академии XVII–XVIII веков), освещение разработки масштабных проектов в данной области. К публикации также принимаются новые двуязычные и комментируемые украинские переводы классических зарубежных философских текстов, освещающие историю философской мысли Украины и других восточноевропейских стран и ее связи с более широким культурным контекстом (теология, литература, естественные науки, политическая идеология и т. д.). Содержание каждого номера распределено по жанровым разделам и тематическим рубрикам. В настоящее время существует 10 жанровых разделов. Языки публикации украинский, английский.
Пример статьи, название - A SYSTEM OF METHODOLOGICAL COORDINATES FOR A HISTORIOGRAPHER OF MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY: A PROPOSAL OF AN EXPLANATORY TOOL. Введение (Introduction) - The progress of the historical-philosophical and historical-theological studies of western medieval thought has been rather considerable in the last decades of the twentieth and the beginning of the twenty-first century. So was the multiplication of the methods employed in the field. The geistesgeschichtliche, neoscholastic, strictly confessional, or blatantly rationalistic approaches of the nineteenth and earlier twentieth centuries gave way to newer techniques of looking at medieval thought, with more attention given to not so well-known personalities, misunderstood or underestimated ideas, social and intellectual contexts, and complexities of the medievals’ intellectual habits. Furthermore, the last thirty years of scholarship, roughly from 1990 through 2020, have produced not only a number of new approaches to the history of medieval philosophy and theology but also several reflections on the ways - both old and new - of dealing with this historical material.
Not so long ago, such scholars as John Inglis, Marcia Colish, Timothy Noone, Catherine König-Pralong, and Trent Pomplun have reflected on and analyzed the major methodological paradigms, trends, and “storylines” within the medieval intellectual historiography of the last hundred years [Colish 2000; Inglis 1998; König-Pralong 2009; Noone 2001; Pomplun 2016]. Others, like Norman Cantor, and numerous authors of various collective works devoted to major academic figures of the recent past highlighted these giants’ personal stories and contributions to medieval scholarship [Aurell & Crosas 2005; Aurell & Pavón Benito 2009; Cantor 1991; Damico 2000]. Similarly, such researchers as Jean Jolivet, Alain de Libera, David Luscombe, Albert Zimmermann, Luca Bianchi, Robert Wielockx, Claude Panaccio, and others concentrated on and assessed the collective contributions made by representatives of “nat ional” historiographical traditions [Aurell 2009; Bianchi 2000; Jolivet 1991; Libera 1991; Luscombe 1991; Zimmermann 1991] and semi institutional “schools” of research [Bose 2006; Panaccio 2000; te Velde 2013, esp. chaps. 17-21; Wielockx 1991].
Still, others, like Philipp Rosemann, John Marenbon, and same Alain de Libera have tried to rethink the nature and methods of the medieval philosophical -theological historiography against the backdrop of and in connection with the broader discipline of philosophy, which encompasses both its history and its current state [Libera 1999, 2014; Marenbon 1998, 2011, 2018; Rosemann 1999]. Similar, although more general, attempts at classification and creative rethinking have also been made in the discipline of church history and historical theology, with some references to medieval theological historiography. Among the most notable are the publications of James Bradley and Richard Muller, Justo González, Jay Green, and avolume prepared by A. Chapman, J. Coffey, and their colleagues [Bradley & Muller 1995, 2016; Chapman et al. 2009; González 2002; Green 2015].
Overall, one cannot fail to see a range of various methods and attitudes. There are probably as many approaches to Abelard, Aquinas, Bonaventure, and their scholastic colleagues’ legacy as their authentic works, and the just-mentioned publications show well what these approaches are and where one spots them. There is no need to duplicate the explanatory schemes and observations made in the informative studies of Inglis, Marenbon, or Pomplun, nor one should disapprove of the sophisticated typologies drawn by Colish and König-Pralong.
Still, I think it is useful to continue their work and supplement it with a possibly helpful explanatory tool. As a contribution to this ongoing assessment of the existing methods of studies in medieval philosophy, I would like to offer a description of an imaginary map or, better, a system of methodological coordinates that allows one to see how current approaches and methods form a panoply of axes which belong together in one complex grid. In my view, the methodological frame of references that currently exists in the field of medieval philosophical-theological historiography may be grasped and described as a complex system of coordinates with three axes. Every axis corresponds to a certain aspect of the historical and systematic research and symbolizes a possible movement between two extremes representing opposite methodological values and directions. Three axes together constitute a three-dimensional grid which helps to visualize the tapestry of approaches, and within which a particular study in medieval thought might be located.
This three-dimensional system of coordinates does not pretend to be exhaustive but can help to chart the existing methodological tendencies and, then, locate one’s approach on this imaginary map. In what follows, I explain this methodological framework and give a few examples of scholarly publications that are to be “located” on the axes of this imaginary scheme.