TEACHER’S HUMANITARIAN THINKING IN M.M.BAHTIN’S WORLDVIEW

Abstract

The article deals with the general problem of the relation of rational and humanitarian view on the world, their interaction and complementarity witch results a theoretical and practical understanding of the task and the formation of teacher’s humanitarian thinking according to the interpretation of M.M.Bahtyn. M.M.Bahtin’s dialogic ideas increasingly penetrate the pedagogy helping to understand the infinitely possible (V.S.Bibler’s term) reality of pedagogical process. Understanding and perception of different speech genres, according to M.M.Bahtyn, and related genres of teacher’s thinking is another aspect of understanding the complexity of the educational process. Humanitarian teacher’s thinking - is so called Buber’s state “BETWEEN” (between the various partial thinking of a physicist, a mathematician, a linguist, a philosopher, individuals). This is V.S.Bibler’s dialogic when the philosopher’s and philologist’s logic of thinking comes instead of mathematician’s logic of thinking, when different logics may be simultaneously present in the teacher’s thinking. Also this is Bahtin’s position «out» when the teacher “goes out” of his thinking and “enters” the student’s thinking, goes out of the boundaries of the mathematician’s or philologist’s thinking and enters the state. Humanitarian teacher’s thinking - is “abnormal” (by following T.Kun) thinking, that is something that goes out of the frames of one paradigm, that is “unscientific thinking” (in V.S.Bibler’s submissions), that is something, going out of the specific science frames. Teacher’s humanitarian thinking, according to M.M.Bahtyn, has to deal with the texts, the descriptions in the form of a text, contexts, but not only with definitions, with the lists of the peculiarities, features characterizing the exact sciences. At the same time humanist thinking should always be at the exit of the text, in dialogue with the infinite context that is involved in the text and goes out of the text. Text unlike scientific definitions is rich for its context that can infinitely cover other texts, go beyond their limits, generally have a “per-endless” properties, because there are no exact boundaries for the context, no limits for its “prevalence”, “wideness”, “imagery”.