The triplet model treats a concept as complex structure that expresses three kinds of information. The first is about entities subsumed under a concept,their properties and relations. The second is about means and ways of representing the first information in intelligent systems. The third is about linkage between the first and second ones and methods of its constructing. The application of triplet models to generalization and development of concept models in philosophy, logic, cognitive psychology, cognitive science, linguistics, artificial intelligence has (...) been demonstrated. The componential structure of the triplet model and extended concept classification have been given. Theoretical considerations are combined with historical case-studies of concept history. For scientists and students with an interest in problems of knowledge structure and representation. Abstract and Extended Summary in English. (shrink)

Development of transdisciplinary strategies involves addressing the question of the relationship between professionals and amateurs in science. The invasion of a foreign professional sphere turns it into an amateur. Effect of amateurism is inseparable from respect for the ideals of scientific. Refining and distribution of scientific standards will enhance the level of professionalism in the humanities and the success of their participation in transdisciplinary research.

The article is devoted to the comic effects in A. Scriabin’s compositions. Existence of metaphysics of laughter in works of composer is researched.

The purpose of this paper is an attempt to outline the main directions of differentiation and correlation of scientific and nonscientific humanities. Humanities in general terms can be defined as knowledge about the inner world of man, in terms of material and ideal cultural entities, endowed with human values, values and senses. In this case, outside the humanities there is knowledge of nature, including human nature, of technology, of the social relationships and regularities. In the humanities it is needed to (...) distinguish between the three spheres. The first one corresponds to the strict scientific standards. It practically does not differ from the natural sciences. Here mathematical models, rigorous methods are applied, verifiable theories are created. They limit the knowledge with a conjunction of at least such attributes: validity, explicitness, validity referentiality, valence, reflexivity. These include many sections of linguistics, some areas of literary criticism and psychology, sociology and quantitative history, etc. The second area uses more blurred scientific standards, soft criteria of rationality, not rigorous methods, narrative explanations, philosophical concepts. But it strives to comply with many of the principles of classical science: evidence, validity, hatchability, corroboration. These include most of the literary criticism, some areas of psychology, qualitative, non-quantitative history, sociology, microhistory, pedagogy. The third major area, the humanitaristics itself is extra-scientific, in the sense that knowingly waives certain requirements of science: from objectivity as literary criticism, from naturalness in explanation, resorting to the recognition of a higher power as theology, from experiment as the philosophy. Coexistence of so many different disciplines under one roof «extra-scientific» emphasizes only one thing: deliberate mismatch some generally accepted standards of science. This does not diminish their merits, in contrast, makes them more free and less bound by restrictions. The second sphere is partially inclined to the first one and also lays claim to scientific status, but it is achievable only in the case of revision or mitigate scientific standards. The third area is the opposite the science and is complementary to it. (shrink)