SPATIAL THINKING, CULTURAL GEOGRAPHY AND WILDERNESS
https://doi.org/10.7868/S2587556618030111
Abstract
Humanities appears now in the “endowed” human being significant and meaningful knowledge as the appropriate meaning of the content of reality. The embodiment of the world picture occurs in multivalued association of signs, symbols, representations and images, where the geography are the only “embedded” in this kind of quickly current processes. Nature was never to humans, it always exists “in itself” and “for itself”, and the man validly “read” and convey its meaning turns out to be possible discourse, while its understanding borders their own limitations of knowledge. In this paper the author’s position are considering via appropriate mapping and interpretation of the opposing “semantic poles” – a wilderness and cultural landscape. In contrast, dichotomous theoretical manifestation of this kind concluded the transcendental meaning of sensory associations (imagery) and rational (logical) cognitive styles of geographical thinking. The concept of the existence the wilderness continuum demonstrates the existing still areas of traditional nature use of indigenous peoples of the Asian part of Russia and those, which modified by anthropogenic development within territory of Siberia.
About the Author
V. N. Bocharnikov
Pacific Institute of Geography, Far Eastern Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Vladivostok
Russian Federation
Vladivostok
References
1. Bocharnikov V.N. Chelovek v realnosti proektsii [Man in Projection of Realities]. Vladivostok: Mor. Gos. Univ., 2011. 332 p.
2. Bocharnikov V.N. The Gestalt Phenomenon in the Paradigm of Human Geography. Astrakhanskii Vestn. Ecolog. Obrazovaniya, 2012, no. 3, pp. 54–63. (In Russ.).
3. Bocharnikov V.N. Wilderness values for humans as a new interdisciplinary research direction. Astrakhanskiy Vestn. Ecolog. Obrazovaniya, 2012, no. 4, pp. 97–104. (In Russ.).
4. Bocharnikov V.N. Geographical knowledge and individualism, perception and research image are important issues of socio-economic geography. Geogr. Vestn., 2013, no. 2, pp. 14–24. (In Russ.).
5. Bocharnikov V.N. Social Science of “wilderness”. Thematic review. Astrakhanskii Vestn. Ecolog. Obrazovaniya, 2015, no. 3, 4, pp. 131–147; pp. 23–43. (In Russ.).
6. Bocharnikov V.N. Cultural Landscapes and Wilderness – Reflection of Scientific Perception in Cultural Geography. Gumanitarny Vektor, 2016, no. 11 (1), pp. 116–127. (In Russ.).
7. Bocharnikov V.N., Egidarev E.G. Wilderness is a new indicator for the assessment of the existing anthropogenic transformation of the territory of Russa. Problemy regionalnoi ecologii, 2015, no. 5, pp. 75–80. (In Russ.).
8. Vernadskii V.I. The problem of time, space and symmetry. Doclad na obshchem sobranii AN SSSR 26. XII. 1931 g. Izv. AN SSSR, Ser. OMEN, 1932, no. 4, pp. 511–554, http://www.vvvasilyev.ru/Kulturol/Vernadski/PVPiS_4.htm. (In Russ.).
9. Gerasimenko T.I., Gladkii I.Yu. Landscape factor of ethno-cultural environment formation. Vestn. OGU, 2005, no. 2, pp. 108–112. (In Russ.).
10. Gladkii Yu.N. Cultural geography: the difficulties of institutionalization. Izv. RGO, 2010, no. 112 (6), pp. 1–13. (In Russ.).
11. Grigoriev Al.A., Paranina G.N. Cultural geography: a step to the roots? Vestn. SPbGU, Ser. 7, 2011, no. 3, pp. 60–72. (In Russ.).
12. Isachenko A.G. Global landscape macro-region system. Izv. RGO, 2007, no. 139 (1), pp. 3–18. (In Russ.).
13. Kaganskii V.L. Landscape and Culture. Obshestvennye Nauki i Sovremennost, 1997, no. 1, pp. 134–145. (In Russ.).
14. Kobylaynskii V.A. Philosofia ecologii. Kratkii kurs [The Philosophy of Ecology. Short Course.]. Moscow: Akademicheskii Proekt Publ., 2010. 632 p.
15. Convention concerning the protection of the World cultural and Natural Heritage. Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-ru.pdf (accessed 5.07.2014)
16. Kotlyakov V.M., Armand A.D., Drozdov A.V., Luyri D.I., Nefedova T.G., Tishkov A.A. Landscape research at Institute of geography Russian Academy of Sciences: status and prospects ahead of 90th anniversary, In Mat. XI Megh. landshaftnoi conferentsi (Proc. Landscape studies: theory, methods, regional studies, practice, Moscow, 22–25 August, 2006). 2006, Moscow: MGU, pp. 14–15. (In Russ.).
17. Kuleshova M.E. Cultural landscapes and prospects of expanding Russia’s representation in the World Heritage List. Izv. RGO, 2012, 144 (5), pp. 71–80. (In Russ.).
18. Claude Lévi Strauss. Pervobytnoe myshlenie [The Savage Mind]. Moscow: Respublika Publ. 1994. 384 p. Available at: http://philosophy.ru/library/myth/levi_strauss_think. pdf (accessed 23.09.2016).
19. Nash R. Wilderness and American Mind. Available at: http://sbiblio.com/BIBLIO/archive/nesh_dikaja/00. aspx (accessed 12.10.2015)
20. Petrenko V.F., Suprun A.P. The methodology of psychosemantics in the context of post-nonclassical rationality philosophy and quantum physics. Vestn. RAN, 2015, 85 (10), pp. 896–905. (In Russ.).
21. Pokrovskii N.E. Henry Thoreau [Genry Toro]. Moscow: Mysl Publ., 1983. 188 p.
22. Ragulina M.V. Scientific heritage of V.B. Sochava and prospects of cultural geography. Geographiya i Prirodnye Resursy, 2016, no. 1, pp. 5–14. (In Russ.).
23. Sokuler Z.A. Methodology of humanitarian knowledge and the concept of” Power-knowledge “ by Michel Foucault. Philosofiya Nauki i Tekhniki, 1998, no. 1, pp. 174–182. (In Russ.).
24. Sochava V.B. Teoreticheskaya i prikladnaya geografiya [Theoretical and Applied Geography]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 2005. 288 p.
25. Streletskiy V.N. Cultural geography in Russia: peculiarities of formation and development. Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., 2008, no. 5, pp. 21–33. (In Russ.).
26. Turaev V.A., Suliandziga R.V., Suliandziga P.V., Bocharnikov V.N. Entsiclopediya korennykh malochislennykh narodov Severa, Sibiri i Dalnego Vostoka Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Encyclopedia of Indigenous Minorities of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation]. Moscow, 2005. 464 p.
27. Tuytuynnik Yu. G. An understanding of the landscape. Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr., no. 2, 1998, pp. 30–38. (In Russ.).
28. Tuytuynnik Yu.G. Proliferation of the concept “landscape”: why it occurs and how to treat it geographers? Izv. RGO, 2013, no. 5, pp. 66–78. (In Russ.).
29. Tsokolov S. Diskurs ratsionalnogo konstruktivizma: traditsi i sceptitsyzma v sovremennoi philosofii i teorii poznanya [The Discourse of Radical Constructivism: a Tradition of Skepticism in Modern Philosophy and Theory of Knowledge]. Phren, Munchen Publ. 2000. 332 p.
30. Bocharnikov V., Laletin A., Angelstam P., Domashov I., Elbakidze M., Kaspruk O., Sayadyan H., Solovyi I., Shukurov E., Urushadze T. Traditional Forest-Related Knowledge: Sustaining Communities, Ecosystems and Biocultural Diversity. Parrota J.A., Trosper R.L., Eds. World Forest Series, Vol. 12. Springer, 2011. pp. 251–279.
31. Booth K.I. What a Difference Place Makes. Qualitative Inquiry, 2015, 21 (1), pp. 20–27.
32. Mapping Wilderness. Concepts, Techniques and Applications. S.J. Carver and S.F. Fritz, Eds. Springer, 2016. 204 p.
33. Sanderson E.W., Jaiteh M., Levy M.A., Redford K.H., Wannebo A.V., Woolmer G. The human footprint and the last of the wild. BioScience, 2002, 52, pp. 891–904.
Review
For citations:
Bocharnikov V.N. SPATIAL THINKING, CULTURAL GEOGRAPHY AND WILDERNESS. Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya. 2018;(3):105-116. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.7868/S2587556618030111
Views:
930
Email this article 
