HISTORICAL EYES OF CONFLICT RESEARCH AND ITS INTERDISCIPLINARY CHARACTER
Zavarika G.
Volodymyr Dahl East Ukrainian National University, Severodonetsk, Ukraine
Abstract:
The scientific category of conflict is considered. The development of knowledge about the conflict in different historical formations is highlighted. It is found that the conflict is interdisciplinary and uses methods of research of various Sciences. The points of view on the place of conflict in the social life of scientists of different eras and specializations are analyzed. It was proved that the theme of the conflict was actual in different stages of the historical development of society. The importance of the study of the conflict in the period of formation of the Ukrainian conflictology is revealed. It is established that at the present stage in Ukraine the analysis and development of foreign experience is carried out, there are original theoretical and methodological developments of various aspects of the conflict.
Today, science faces an important problem related to the emergence of conflicts – the study of factors that contribute to their emergence. Scientific interest is largely related to the growth of tension in various spheres of socio-economic and socio-political interaction, aggression and terrorism, ethnic conflicts. Our society, political elite, political scientists were unprepared for this difficult situation. Orientation to the” conflict-free ” development of society made the problems of conflicts unpromising. This led not only to its de facto exclusion from the field of scientific research but also to the fact that society has not formed mechanisms for predicting the emergence of conflicts. Attempts to copy the experience of foreign conflictologists in the field of socio-political problems are not designed for universal complement in any socio-cultural conditions, are unsuccessful. This contradiction lies in the awareness of the need for scientific understanding and practical work on the issue related to the collection of information, it’s systematization, analysis and forecasting of possible conflicts. The practical significance of the work lies in the conclusions about the need for a more in-depth and comprehensive approach to the study of factors contributing to the emergence of conflicts by effective, qualitative methods on the basis of knowledge of history, political science, sociology, psychology, social geography, political economy, political marketing in order to prevent and quickly eliminate them.
Keywords:
conflict, interdisciplinary character, geoconflictology, story.
Language:
Ukrainian
DOI: http://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2721.2018.72.10
References:
1. Arystotel. Polytyka . Afynskaia polytyia / Predysl. E.Y.Temnova. – M., 1997.
2. Bzhezynskyi Z. Prezhdevremennoe partnerstvo // Polytycheskye yssledovanyia. – 1994. – № 1. – S. 58-67.
3. Blazhennyi Avhustyn . O hrade bozhyem . Soch. v 4-kh t. T. 4. – SPb., 1998.
4. Bekon F. O dostoynstve y pryumnozhenyy nauk / Sochynenyia v dvukh tomakh. 2-e yspr. y dop. yzd. T. 1. Sost., obshch. red. y vstupyt. statia A.L.Subbotyna. – M., 1977.
5. Veber M. Sotsiolohiia . Zahalnoistorychni analizy . Polityka : Per. z nim. O.Pohorilyi. – K.: Osnovy, 1998. – 534 s.
6. Hehel H. Nauka lohyky . – M., 1999.
7. Hrushevskyi M.S. Vsesvitnia istoriia v korotkim ohliadi : V 6 ch. Ch. 1. – K., 1996.
8. Darendorf R. Sovremennyi sotsyalnyi konflykt . Ocherk polytycheskoi svobody : Per. s nem. – M., 2002.
9. Dekart R. Yzbrannye proyzvedenyia : Per. s fr. Y.Latynskoho. Red. y vstup. st. V.V.Sokolova. – M., 1950.
10. Zavarika H. Teoretychne obhruntuvannia konfliktnoi modeli suspilstva . Heohrafiia ta turyzm: Nauk. zb / Red. kol. Ya. B. Oliinyk ta in.. ─ K.: Alfa-P IK, 2016.─ Vyp. 37. – 294 s. – S. 189-198.
11. Zymmel H. Yzbrannoe. Tom 1. Fylosofyia kultury. – M., 1996.
12. Kant Y. Novoe osveshchenye pervykh pryntsypov metafyzycheskoho poznanyia / Sochynenyia: V 8-my t. T. 1. – M., 1994. – S. 261-312.
13.Kotyhorenko V. Suchasni kontseptsii konfliktu yak suspilnoho yavyshcha // Liudyna i polityka. – 2002. – № 3. – S. 75-87.
14.Kryvytska O. Tolerantnist chy konfrontatsiia: vektory etnokonfliktnoho potentsialu Ukrainy // Liudyna i polityka. – 2002. – № 1. – S. 17-32.
15.Makyavelly N. Hosudar. – SPb., 2000. – S. 29-138.
16.Marks K. Kapytal. Krytyka polytycheskoi ekonomyy. T. 1. Kn. 1. Protsess proyzvodstva kapytala. – M., 1988.
17.Matsiievskyi Yu.V. Konfliktolohiia: shcho ta yak vyvchaty? // Liudyna i polityka. – 2000. – № 1. – S. 25-29.
18.Monteskё Sh. O sushchestve zakonov. Ch. 1. – M., 1809.
19. Platon. Hosudarstvo. Sochynenyia. V 3-kh t.: Per. s drevnehrech. pod obshch. red. A.F.Loseva y V.F.Asmusa. T. 3. Ch. 1. Red. V.F.Asmus. – M., 1971.
20. Skovoroda H.S. Povne zibrannia tvoriv u dvokh tomakh. T. 1. – K., 1973.
21.Spenser H. Opyty nauchnye, polytycheskye y fylosofskye. Sochynenyia. T. 1 / Pod obshch. red. N.A.Rubakyna. – SPb., 1899.
22.Tokvil A. Pro demokratiiu v Amerytsi: U 2-kh tomakh: Perekl. z fr. H.Filipchuka ta M.Moskalenka. Peredmova Andre Zhardena. – K., 1999.
23. Freid Z. Vvedenye v psykhoanalyz: Lektsyy / Avtory ocherka o Freide F.V.Bassyn y M.H.Iaroshevskyi. – M., 1989.
24.Iunh K. Tevystokskye lektsyy / Yssledovanye protsessa yndyvyduatsyy: Per. s anhl. – M.; – K., 1998.
Suggested citation:
Zavarika G. (2018) Historical eyes of conflict research and its interdisciplinary character. Visnyk Kyivskogo nacionalnogo universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka, Geografiya [Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Geography], 3 (72), 60-65 (in Ukranian, abstr. in English).