ru | En
PHILOSOPHICAL
LITERARY
JOURNAL
ISSN 0869-5377
Author: Kobylin Igor

Kobylin Igor

Associate Professor, Department of Social Sciences, kigor55@mail.ru. Nizhny Novgorod State Medical Academy, 10/1 Minin & Pozharsky sq., 603950, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia.

Publications

Games Methodologists Play: Michel Foucault and the Organizational Management Project of Georgy Shchedrovitsky / Logos. 2019. № 2 (129). P. 268-288
annotation:  The article considers Georgy Shchedrovitsky’s organizational management project in the light of Michel Foucault’s works on liberal governmentality. As Michel Foucault convincingly pointed out, liberalism understood as a managerial technique seeks to “manage by not managing.” In that context, even relatively soft late Soviet governmentality seems outmoded and overdone with its omnipresent state control, ideological dictates, and rigid adherence to ritual. Many criticized that authoritative governmentality, but even those critical attacks often shared the Soviet enthusiasm for molding a new society from above. Shchedrovitsky’s theory of management is frequently described as radically constructivist, “engineering,” and (despite harsh criticism from the Soviet nomenklatura) authoritarian in the Bolshevik style. Nevertheless, analysis of his “Organization, Guidance, Management” shows the view that it others nothing but a kind of “policing” is to some extent misguided. First, an organizational management project itself can be regarded as a certain kind of “liberalization” of the modern world’s high-tech production. Second, the main goal of Shchedrovitsky’s organizational management activity was not total control over those managed, but rather a redefinition of the relationship between the process of natural transformations and the process of artificial technical conversions. The thing managed is said to be a “centaur-object”: it is capable of natural evolution, self-propulsion, but can also be manipulated from outside. The art of management is finding a balance that would provide relative autonomy to natural transformations, and also turn artificial technical conversions into meaningful and long-term planned activities instead of stereotyped reproductions of past experience.
Keywords:  Soviet philosophy; governmentality; biopolitics; artificial and natural; hybrids and “centaur-objects”
American Trauma Studies and the Limits of Their Transitivity in Russia. Heart-To-Heart Talks With Veterans of Local Conflicts / Logos. 2017. № 5 (120). P. 115-136
annotation:  This article considers the formation contexts and conceptual content of American trauma studies, and raises a question of the prospects for carrying out similar research in Russia. What is meant here is, primarily, the “war trauma” of combatants. Studying oral testimonies of Russian veterans of the Afghan and Chechen Wars, the authors discuss the difficulties the combatants face when trying to articulate their war experience. However, such “representation failures” can by no means always be described using the medical term “trauma,” especially since “medicalization” and “victimization” strategies frequently encounter opposition by the veterans themselves. Therefore, in order to do justice to theoretical and practical trauma studies, the authors suggest a cautious ‘reconnaissance’ over ready-made models and “strong programmes,” the reconnaissance being highly sensitive to both the socio-political context of a testimony and the voice of the witness. The metaphor of “trauma” exists in the veterans’ narrative in various contexts. Most frequently, it occurs within an existentialist discursive strategy as a marker of a liminal — and often sublime — experience. On the other hand, it can be used when describing the corporal nature of memory, rooted in everyday habits and habitus. However, this metaphor rarely occurs in cultural-ideological or ironic narratives. The stories of the veterans are typically very fragmentary, amounting to a situational interweaving of the aforementioned narrative lines. Reducing this precarious conglomerate to a singular discursive line — and turning it into a policy of representation imposed from above — can hardly be justified. That is why the authors emphasize the importance of a phenomenological description of experience from below, with all its gaps and contradictions, rather than the mechanical use of readymade theoretical schemes and intellectual clichés.
Keywords:  politics of memory; veterans; local conflicts; testimony; trauma studies

Kobylin Igor

Associate Professor, Department of Social Sciences, kigor55@mail.ru. Privolzhsky Research Medical University, 10/1 Minin and Pozharsky sq., 603950 Nizhny Novgorod, Russia

Publications

Games Methodologists Play: Michel Foucault and the Organizational Management Project of Georgy Shchedrovitsky / Logos. 2019. № 2 (129). P. 268-288
annotation:  The article considers Georgy Shchedrovitsky’s organizational management project in the light of Michel Foucault’s works on liberal governmentality. As Michel Foucault convincingly pointed out, liberalism understood as a managerial technique seeks to “manage by not managing.” In that context, even relatively soft late Soviet governmentality seems outmoded and overdone with its omnipresent state control, ideological dictates, and rigid adherence to ritual. Many criticized that authoritative governmentality, but even those critical attacks often shared the Soviet enthusiasm for molding a new society from above. Shchedrovitsky’s theory of management is frequently described as radically constructivist, “engineering,” and (despite harsh criticism from the Soviet nomenklatura) authoritarian in the Bolshevik style. Nevertheless, analysis of his “Organization, Guidance, Management” shows the view that it others nothing but a kind of “policing” is to some extent misguided. First, an organizational management project itself can be regarded as a certain kind of “liberalization” of the modern world’s high-tech production. Second, the main goal of Shchedrovitsky’s organizational management activity was not total control over those managed, but rather a redefinition of the relationship between the process of natural transformations and the process of artificial technical conversions. The thing managed is said to be a “centaur-object”: it is capable of natural evolution, self-propulsion, but can also be manipulated from outside. The art of management is finding a balance that would provide relative autonomy to natural transformations, and also turn artificial technical conversions into meaningful and long-term planned activities instead of stereotyped reproductions of past experience.
Keywords:  Soviet philosophy; governmentality; biopolitics; artificial and natural; hybrids and “centaur-objects”
American Trauma Studies and the Limits of Their Transitivity in Russia. Heart-To-Heart Talks With Veterans of Local Conflicts / Logos. 2017. № 5 (120). P. 115-136
annotation:  This article considers the formation contexts and conceptual content of American trauma studies, and raises a question of the prospects for carrying out similar research in Russia. What is meant here is, primarily, the “war trauma” of combatants. Studying oral testimonies of Russian veterans of the Afghan and Chechen Wars, the authors discuss the difficulties the combatants face when trying to articulate their war experience. However, such “representation failures” can by no means always be described using the medical term “trauma,” especially since “medicalization” and “victimization” strategies frequently encounter opposition by the veterans themselves. Therefore, in order to do justice to theoretical and practical trauma studies, the authors suggest a cautious ‘reconnaissance’ over ready-made models and “strong programmes,” the reconnaissance being highly sensitive to both the socio-political context of a testimony and the voice of the witness. The metaphor of “trauma” exists in the veterans’ narrative in various contexts. Most frequently, it occurs within an existentialist discursive strategy as a marker of a liminal — and often sublime — experience. On the other hand, it can be used when describing the corporal nature of memory, rooted in everyday habits and habitus. However, this metaphor rarely occurs in cultural-ideological or ironic narratives. The stories of the veterans are typically very fragmentary, amounting to a situational interweaving of the aforementioned narrative lines. Reducing this precarious conglomerate to a singular discursive line — and turning it into a policy of representation imposed from above — can hardly be justified. That is why the authors emphasize the importance of a phenomenological description of experience from below, with all its gaps and contradictions, rather than the mechanical use of readymade theoretical schemes and intellectual clichés.
Keywords:  politics of memory; veterans; local conflicts; testimony; trauma studies
All authors

© 1991—2020 Логос. Философско-литературный журнал.
Все права защищены.
Дизайн Юлия Михина, jmikhina@gmail.com,
программирование Антон Чубченко