THE CONCEPT OF AN “OPEN SOCIETY” IN THE DEBATES OF THE 20TH CENTURY

Hanna Nikolenko

doi:10.23856/4029

Hanna Nikolenko H. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0973-3783

Keywords: open society, transformation, debates, conceptualization, historical retrospective, human values

Abstract

In the paper, the evolution of the concept of an “opened” society, which has been looking for a period from the middle of the ХХ century to the beginning ХХІ, is revealed. In the context of social and philosophical preliminaries, it is illustrated how the problem of openness is being shaped around the historical-philosophical and social-political issues. The reconstruction of the mechanisms of recognition, the transformation and development of the phenomenon of “openness” and the integration of the cultural and historical process have been built. In addition to the sensual, cultural, systematic approaches, the criteria of “openness” is conceptualized, on the basis of which the analysis of the current social concepts and the backward transformations of the spiritual tendencies of the human world are presented. The paper presents the periodization of the concepts of “openness” in accordance with the changing of historical, philosophical and cultural and social context of the XX–XXI centuries. The specifics of the opposition of “open” and “closed” societies of A. Bergson on a number of specific features related to the stages of evolution of the mind: adaptation to circumstances, development of imagination, beginning of creativity, creation and self-reflection of one's own space (an activity beyond instinctive nature). It is emphasized that the idea of “openness” as “development” and “creativity” formed the basis of scientific analysis of further social transformations.

References

1. Ahmad, I. (1966). Closed Minds and Open Systems. Sociological Bulletin. № 15, (2).
2. Aurora, G. S. (1966). Open Systems of Consciousness. Sociological Bulletin. № 15, (1).
3. Brown, M.R. (1951). Book Review: The Open Society and Its Enemies. Review & Expositor. № 48, 2.
4. Cohn, E.J. (1970). Turkish Economic, Social, and Political Change: The Development of a More Prosperous and Open Society. New York: Praeger.
5. Jarvie, I., Pralong, S. (2005). Popper’s Open Society After Fifty Years. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
6. Kemp, G.C. (1962). Critical Thinking: Open and Closed Minds. American Behavioral Scientist. №. 5, (5).
7. Kook, T. (1951). Philosophy and Religion: Popper, Karl R. The Open Society and Its Enemies. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. № 274, (1).
8. Lester, D. (1971). Suicide and Homicide in Open and Closed Societies. Psychological Reports. № 29, (2).
9. Magee, B. (2005). What use is Popper to a practical politician? Popper’s Open Society After Fifty Years: The Continuing Relevance of Karl Popper. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
10. Meisel, J.H. (1950). Book Reviews: The Open Society and Its Enemies. By KARL R. POPPER. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
11. Murray, J.E. (1967). The Reardon Press Formula: Threat to Our Open Society. The Journalism Educator. № 22, (4).
12. Pralong, S. (2005). Minima Moralia: is there an ethics of the open society? Popper’s Open Society After Fifty Years: The Continuing Relevance of Karl Popper. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
13. Price, E.T. (1971). Open Prisons and Public Safety. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology. № 4, (3).
14. Scudder, K.J. (1954). The Open Institution. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. № 293, (1).
15. Wallace, M. (1950). Book Review: The Open Self. Union Seminary Magazine. № 4, (1).
16. Germino, D., Beyme, K. (1974). The Open Society in Theory and Practice. Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.