Archetypification as the Ideology and Technology of Educational Process

The article is based on the methodology of development of the cultural heritage of the past, which translates the value of educational stability. For this purpose, the concept of generatype is introduced in the form of an educational model that concentrates the best of what humanity has preserved for the formation of human. Generatypes are derived from the change of cultural matrices, vary from era to era and depend on the nature of evolutionary changes of these sources within the individual cultural stages of social evolution. The concept we introduce does not mean grandiose “chips” of archetypal ideas, but only correlates them with the new human and the new world. A generatype is a total (collective) image that creates a special edu­cational ideology and determines the nature of human actions. It is the totality of human actions that forms a special type of person developed in a particular era. The most important in this process is the idea of accumulation of meanings. Educatio­nal gene­ratypes act as structural principles of exteriorization of educational reality, in which we distinguish the following periods characterized by specific generatypes: Antiquity, the Middle Ages, the 17th—18th centuries, the 19th and 20th centuries. Classical literature and the art of the past give us examples of spiritual dominants of each cultural era. The anthropological ideals we identify are the following: Antiquity — the hero, the Middle Ages — the saint, the Age of Enlightenment — the encyclopedist (universalist), the 19th century — the engineer/artist, the 20th century — the financier. Actualization of the ideas of the past is the extraction of the studied material from long-term and short-term memory for the purpose of its subsequent use in recognition or direct reproduction in the modern educational process. The combination of educational ideologies (ideas) of different relevance opens up new facets of modern educational theory and practice and reveals their cultural potential. Moreover, the mechanism of actualization should not be based on rough mo­dernization, but involves the use of receptive abilities of people, the development of their imagination and emotional memory. The cognitive-metaphorical scheme of synthesis of humanitarian content given in the article provides an example of the stated idea development both in the research direction and in the educational-applied space of new technologies of teaching eternal meanings.

archetypification, archetype, educational process, model, philosophy of education, tradition, paradigm, generatype, cultural matrix

1. Jung C.G. Dusha i mif: shest’ arkhetipov [Soul and Myth: Six Archetypes]. Moscow, Kiev, Port-Royal Publ., Sovershenstvo Publ., 1997, 384 p.

2. Borev Yu.B. Estetika [Aesthetics]. Moscow, Politizdat Publ., 1988, 496 p.

3. Valeeva E.V. Analog Model of Modern Education, Observatoriya kul’tury [Observatory of Culture], 2014, no. 1, pp. 96—101 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.25281/2072-3156-2014-0-1-96-101.

4. Valeeva E.V. Universal Educational Metaphors, Observatoriya kul’tury [Observatory of Culture], 2015, no. 4, pp. 18—24 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.25281/2072-3156-2015-0-4-18-24.

5. Kulikova L.V. (ed.) Diskursivnye praktiki sovremennoi institutsional’noi kommunikatsii: monografiya [Discursive Practices of Modern Institutional Communication: monograph]. Krasnoyarsk, Sibirskii Federal’nyi Universitet Publ., 2015, 182 p.

6. Goldsmith O. The Citizen of the World, or Letters from a Chinese Philosopher, Residing in London, to his Friends in the East. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1974, 384 p. (in Russ.).

7. Parsons T. The Structure of Social Action. Moscow, Akademicheskii Proekt Publ., 2000, 880 p. (in Russ.).

8. Eliade M. Aspekty mifa [Aspects of Myth]. Moscow, Invest-PPP Publ., ST “PPP” Publ., 1996, 240 p.

9. Losev A.F. Istoriya antichnoi estetiki [The History of Ancient Aesthetics]. Moscow, Vysshaya Shkola Publ., 1963, vol. 1, 584 p.

10. Mark M., Pearson C. The Hero and the Outlaw: Building Extraordinary Brands Through the Power of Archetypes. St. Petersburg, Piter Publ., 2005, 336 p. (in Russ.).

11. Markov B.V. Khram i rynok. Chelovek v prostranstve kul’tury [The Temple and the Market. Man in the Space of Culture]. St. Petersburg, Aleteiya Publ., 1999, 304 p.

12. Foucault M. Volya k istine: po tu storonu znaniya, vlasti i seksual’nosti [The Will for Truth: Beyond Knowledge, Power and Sexuality]. Moscow, Kastal’ Publ., 1996, 448 p.

13. Descartes R. Sochineniya : v 2 t. [Works: in 2 volumes]. Moscow, Mysl’ Publ., 1989, vol. 1, 654 p.

14. Kant I. Sochineniya : v 6 t. [Works. In 6 Volumes]. Moscow, Mysl’ Publ., 1966, vol. 5, 564 p.

15. Fichte J.G. Sochineniya : v 2 t. [Works in Two Volumes]. St. Petersburg, Mifril Publ., 1993, vol. 2, 798 p.

16. Voltaire. Bog i lyudi: stat’i, pamflety, pis’ma. V 2 t. [The God and People: articles, pamphlets, letters. In 2 volumes]. Moscow, Akademii Nauk SSSR Publ., 1961, vol. 1, 442 p.

17. Darwin Ch. On the Origin of Species. Moscow, Biologicheskoi i Meditsinskoi Literatury Publ, 1937, 832 p. (in Russ.).

18. Kuparashvili M.D. Lektsii po sovremennoi filosofii: Modernizm [Lectures on Modern Philosophy: Modernism]. Moscow, Librokom Publ., 2014, 336 p.

19. Dreiser Th. The Financier. Moscow, Eksmo Publ., 2009, 730 p. (in Russ.).

20. Huizinga J. Homo Ludens. St. Petersburg, Ivana Limbakha Publ., 2011, 416 p. (in Russ.).

21. Fortunatova V.A. Gameology in the Context of Education as a Scientific Concept and Methodology, Obrazovatel’nye tekhnologii [Educational Technologies], 2016, no. 3, pp. 27—35 (in Russ.).