Problematization of Modern Philosophical Anthropology and Prospects of its Development

Introduction. The paper is devoted to the problematization, updating and analysis of the development prospects of modern philosophical anthropology. The author seeks to clearly define the concept, status and position of philosophical anthropology among philosophical disciplines, identifying problems in this area, including those associated with the concept of "death of man".

Methodology and sources. The condition, the complex and ambiguous path of development of philosophical and anthropological knowledge throughout the XX century is examined in detail. For the further productive development of philosophical anthropology, the need for its critical problematization is recognized. Special attention is devoted to the relationship between the philosophical anthropology of Max Scheler and the fundamental ontology of Martin Heidegger.

Results and discussion. Multiple methods of understanding philosophical anthropology and determining its semantic horizon are distinguished, which complicates the meaningful concretization of this discipline in the 20th century. The author of the paper emphasizes that philosophical anthropology, if it wants to be philosophia prima, should not abandon the ontological context, but strive to create a new, personalized oriented ontology, actualizing the person's personal understanding. For this, it is necessary to critically take into account the experience of the Orthodox understanding of personality in Byzantine patristics, Russian religious philosophy, phenomenology, the philosophy of Scheler and Heidegger, and even the works of French philosophers of the second half of the 20th century, primarily M. Foucault, who developed the chain of "death of man", but in his later works he approached a new, productive understanding of man.

Conclusion. Modern philosophical anthropology should critically rethink the history of its development and open up to the urgent problems of modernity, for example, intersubjectivity, the philosophy of communication, and especially visuality, presented in the form of a productive aesthetics of the human image. The author expresses a cautious hope that philosophical anthropology can become a locomotive for the development of all modern philosophy.

1. Sheler, M. (1994), Izbrannyie proizvedeniya [Selected works], Transl. by Denezhkin, A.V., Malinkin, A.N. and Fillipov, A.F. Gnozis, Moscow, RUS.

2. Sheler, M. (2007), Filosofskie fragmenty iz rukopisnogo naslediya [Philosophische Fragmente ays dem Nachlass], Transl. by Khor'kov, M. and Gabel', M., Institut filosofii, teologii i istorii sv. Fomyi, Moscow, RUS.

3. Dorofeev, D.Yu. (2019), Max Scheler, Nauka, SPb, RUS.

4. Dorofeev, D.Yu. (2017), "Max Scheler's Phenomenology of Intersubjectivity and Sympathy. Preface to the Translation of Max Scheler's book "the Nature of Sympathy" (Section A, I-II)", Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology, no. 6 (2), pp. 282-302. DOI: 10.21638/2226-5260-2017-6-2-282-302.

5. Dorofeev, D.Yu. (2012), Pod znakom filosofskoy antropologii. Spontannost i suverennost v klassicheskoy i sovremennoy filosofii [Under the sign of philosophical anthropology. Spontaneity and sovereignty in classical and modern philosophy], Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ, Moscow, SPb, RUS.

6. Ziziulas, J. (2006), Being as Communion. Studies in Personhood and the Church, Transl. by Gzgzyan, D.M., Svyato-Filaretskiy pravoslavno-hristianskiy institute, Moscow, RUS.

7. Ziziulas, J. (2012), Communication and Otherness. New Essays about Personality and the Church, Transl. by Tolstoluzhenko, M. and Kolker, L., BBI, Moscow, RUS.

8. Foucault, M. (1994), Les Mots et les Choses. Une Archeologie des Sciences Humaines, Transl. by Vizgin, V.P. and Avtonomova, N.S., A-cad, SPb, RUS.