LEADING MOTIVES OF GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCHES: WHAT THEY ARE AND DO WE NEED THEM?
https://doi.org/10.7868/S0373244417030100
Abstract
The contents and results of discussion about the leitmotivs of geographical researches are outlined. The contents and the usefulness of these notions, formulated by one of the panelists in 2001, are discussed. The advantages and disadvantages of the leitmotivs in comparison with the research programs (according to I. Lakatos) are compared. Two positions are revealed. The first position is leitmotivs are useful, albeit with reservations, because they contribute to the consolidation of researches in different subject areas of geography and broadcast the existing principles and methods for the formulation and solution of new tasks. The second position is leitmotivs are useless or even destructive. They are not aimed at finding new knowledge. This position originates from the concept of a geographical leitmotiv as a postmodernist type of representation of reality, which is unacceptable in a rational science. Moreover, the search of leitmotivs, which are in principle characterized by fuzziness and ambiguity of formulations, returns us to the practice of medieval researches. Currently, a compromise between the advocates of these opposing positions seems to be impossible.
About the Authors
A. V. Drozdov
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
V. L. Kagansky
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
E. Yu. Kolbovsky
Moscow State University, Moscow
Russian Federation
Faculty of Geography
Russian Federation
Faculty of Geography
A. I. Treivish
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
V. A. Shuper
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Baburin V.L. Legends and realities of sustainable development through the prism of geography. Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., 2011, no. 4, pp. 97–106. (In Russ.).
2. Brunet A., Guichard J.-P. La visée hégémonique de la Chine – L’impérialisme économique. Paris: L’Harmattan, 2011, 207 p.
3. Vishnevsky A.G. Vremya demograficheskikh peremen (Time of Demographical Changes). Moscow: Higher School of Economics Publ., 2015, 517 p.
4. Hettner A. Die Geographie, ihre Geschichte, ihr Wesen und ihre Methoden. Breslau, 1927.
5. Grigorjev S.I., Rastov Ju.E. Osnovy sovremennoi sotsiologii (Fundamentals of Contemporary Sociology). Moscow: The Russian Educational Society Publ., 2002, 256 p.
6. Global warming ended in 1998. Izvestiya, 12.04.2006. http://izvestia.ru/news/376382. (In Russ.).
7. Drozdov A.V. Leading Motives of Geography. Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., 2001, no. 3, p. 7–14. (In Russ.).
8. Kapitsa S.P. Paradoksy rosta. Zakony razvitiya chelovechestva (The Paradoxes of Growth: The Laws of Mankind Development). Moscow: Alpina-Non-Fiction Publ., 2012, 204 p.
9. Podorvanjuk N. Glacial period will come in 15 years. GAZETA.ru, 16.07.2015. (In Russ.). http://www.gazeta. ru/science/2015/07/16_a_7641753.shtml (In Russ.).
10. Stepin V.S., Gorokhov V.G., Rozov M.A. Filosofiya nauki i tekhniki (Philosophy of Science and Technology). Moscow: Gardariki Publ., 1999, 400 p.
11. Fedotova V.G. Modernizatsia i kultura (Modernization and Culture). Moscow: Progress-Tradicija Publ., 2016, 336 p.
12. Tselikov D. Climate change: the case of the missing heat. COMPULENTA, 16.01.2014 http://compulenta.computerra.ru/zemlya/klimatologiya/10010926/. (In Russ.).
13. Treivish A. Territorial symmetry, rhythmics and edge effects in their positional and compositional sense, in Geograficheskoe polozhenue i territorial’nye struktury. Pamyati I.M. Maergoiza (Geographical Position and Territorial Structures. In Memory of I.M. Maergoiz). Moscow: New Chronograph Publ., 2012, pp. 368–390. (In Russ.).
14. Shuper V.A. The formation of research programs in economic and social geography, in Issledovatel’skie programmy v sovremennoi nauke (Research programs in modern science). Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1987, pp. 203–221. (In Russ.).
15. Shuper V.A. Development of theoretical concepts in spatial analysis. Reg, Res, Russ., 2011, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 386–393.
16. Shuper V.A. Scientific rationalism and the development of geography (concerning article of A.V. Gladkij and Yu.N. Golubchikov). Reg. Issledovaniya, 2015, no. 3 (49), pp. 163–169. (In Russ.).
17. Lönz M. Getrennt marschieren, vereint schlagen? Ueber ID eintritt at und die Differenz als Europaeische Leitmotive. Sustainable Multilinguali, 2012, no. 1. http://dx. doi.org/10.7220/2335-2027.1.5
18. Seifert A. Leitmotive im 20. Jahrhundert: Körper, Maschine und Tod. Zur symbolischen Artikulation in Kunst und Jugendkultur. Dissertation zum Erwerb des Grades eines Dr. Phil. im Fachbereich 2 (Erziehungswissenschaft, Psychologie, Sport- und Bewegungswissenschaften) an der Universität-Gesamthochschule Essen. http://duepublico.uni-duisburg-essen.de/servlets/DerivateServlet/Derivate-11074/Diss_seifert.pdf
Review
For citations:
Drozdov A.V., Kagansky V.L., Kolbovsky E.Yu., Treivish A.I., Shuper V.A. LEADING MOTIVES OF GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCHES: WHAT THEY ARE AND DO WE NEED THEM? Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya. 2017;(3):118-128. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.7868/S0373244417030100
Views:
733
Email this article 
