Methodological aspects of teaching the methodology of humanitarian research on the example of structural and synergetic analysis

Voronova Natlia Igorevna ORCID: 0000-0003-0728-757X PhD in Philosophy Associate Professor of the Department of Philosophy, History, Political Science and Law of the State Social and Humanitarian University 30 Zelenaya str., Kolomna, Moscow region, 140411, Russia voronova-ni@mail.ru Other publications by this author     Mihailov Denis Vladimirovich ORCID: 0009-0005-9131-1131 Assistant; Department of Aesthetics and Ethics; Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia 197046, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Malaya Posadskaya nab., 26, office 303a dmihaylov@herzen.spb.ru

Nikiforova Anastasiia Aleksandrovna ORCID: 0000-0002-8410-9446 PhD in Philosophy Associate Professor; Department of Aesthetics and Ethics; A.I. Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University 191186, Russia, St. Petersburg, nab. Sinks, 48 zuru-s@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

The methodology of humanitarian research is a stumbling block for term papers and theses in the areas of the humanitarian cycle. Higher education institutions rarely develop and offer students a special course on research methodology. It is tacitly believed that this skill should be mastered by students of humanities (not philosophical specialties) on their own, or with the help of a supervisor of a course or thesis. Nevertheless, almost all students, without exception, face methodological problems when writing their texts. What this leads to: the lack of novelty of the work, its descriptive nature, the inability to set goals and objectives and, accordingly, draw adequate conclusions. On the other hand, the use of exclusively special research methods, typical for, for example, sociology, history, literature, leaves the study highly specialized, which has not reached the philosophical level of generalization of the material.

The research work of students is based, first of all, on the correct formulation of research goals and objectives and the choice of an appropriate methodology. Answering the questions "why is this topic interesting to me and relevant in Russian culture or world practice", students learn to set real goals and choose appropriate ways to achieve them. The methodological approach presented in the article helps to make this choice more transparent by offering a simple visual solution, as well as a strategy for choosing a methodology depending on the setting of the goal and objectives of a hypothetical study.

Problem statement

There are a significant number of textbooks devoted to the methods and methodology of scientific research, which describe the general rules of conducting scientific work, as well as general theoretical methods of studying the material. An example of a fundamental approach to the methodology of humanitarian knowledge is the work of M.S. Kagan ^[1]. Many texts are also devoted to the applied aspects of humanitarianism, its categorical apparatus, and the content of the problem field ^[2]. More specific strategies and methods of humanitarian research are described in fewer articles and manuals, the content of which varies greatly depending on which field of humanitarian knowledge the publication is devoted to – sociology, psychology, history, etc. Nevertheless, with all this wealth of texts, in the course of teaching the methodology of humanitarian research, questions inevitably arise not only about describing the methods themselves, but also comparing them, identifying strengths and weaknesses, studying examples, as well as adapting these methods to the research needs of students. Otherwise, any method for students will remain only a fact of history, not applicable to their own texts (reports, academic articles, term papers and final qualifying papers). In the educational literature, which students of the humanities can familiarize themselves with, as a rule, there is a consistent historiographical description of the formation of philosophical knowledge (for example, in textbooks on the history of Western European philosophy of the twentieth century or author's workshops ^[3]) indicating personalities and main achievements, for example, phenomenology, semiotics, etc. Meaningfully, these texts rarely refer to the actual practice of applying the described methods in specific studies: for this you need to refer to modern articles, additional methodological manuals or specialized course programs (such as "philological hermeneutics", "phenomenology of religion", "semiotics of advertising", etc.). It turns out that students are offered an introduction to the theory and the history of methods, but not their practical development.

The methodological approach to teaching the methodology of humanitarian research outlined in this article suggests leading the student from the simple to the complex, from concrete examples to scientific positions, from applied and pressing issues of writing a course or final qualifying work to serious theory. This approach can be applied to illustrate the work of any method. In this article, a step-by-step analysis of structural and synergetic analysis is proposed as an example. The use of two methods at once to demonstrate the work of the proposed approach is justified, since it is in comparison that the difference between tools and results is clearly visible, the nature of which students need to know even before they choose one or another methodology. During the development of this methodological approach, another problem was identified: the lack of textbooks on building a comprehensive methodology in the humanitarian field, which would present a systematic analysis of methods with recommendations for their application, rather than their consistent historical description. At the same time, the complex methodology itself, using techniques and tools of various methods, is successfully used in a variety of studies.

In modern educational literature, both structuralism and synergetics are considered both as philosophical doctrines and as research methods. At this stage of their development, the structural is being integrated with the methods of natural and social sciences, and the synergetic with the humanities. As for the direct comparison of structuralism and synergetics, the search for publications showed that analytical articles are more often devoted to related or successive methods, for example, structuralism and poststructuralism, etc. This is probably due to the fact that historically some new approaches to research have emerged as antagonists in relation to previous ones. Publications critically describing the relationship between synergetics and structuralism are isolated and have no educational character. In rare cases, synergetics is considered as a methodology that developed in parallel with poststructuralism, or as a form of dialectical denial of structuralism as such. At the same time, there are in–depth studies that directly use both structuralism and synergetics as ways of modeling the cultural environment, for example, the work of A.Ya. Flier ^[4] is excellent as an illustration of the work of various methods, but at this level of understanding of cultural phenomena, the explanation of the conceptual apparatus is no longer provided directly in the text.

Methodological approach to the presentation of the material and its main stages

At first glance, synergetics and structuralism are completely dissimilar forms of scientific analysis, with different origins, areas of interest and applications. Nevertheless, they have something in common and it is quite natural to draw parallels in their tools. As already mentioned, the methodological approach to teaching is based on the movement from simple to complex, from applied issues of students' educational research to scientific generalization. In this regard, it is necessary to visually present the methods chosen for the example sequentially, in three stages: first, in a simplified way, in the form of a table, where the emphasis is placed on the simplest concepts used in any research, including in the scientific work of students. At the second stage, some of the positions are explained in more detail, supported by historical data, theoretical achievements of the ideologists of science, and examples of specific modern research. At the third stage, the methods of synergetics and structuralism are compared in terms of their expediency of application in scientific research.

To implement the first stage, those that can be directly applied in the student's research work were selected as positions for comparison, placing them in a specific problem field (their list can be adjusted or expanded). These are: the concept of the object of research, the main categories describing the properties of the object, the nature of its internal patterns, external factors affecting the object, features of development, as well as the value of the object. All these positions are important for the formulation of relevance in student research, as well as the definition of novelty, object and object detection, etc. (Table 1).

Since the object of research in real student works can be both a work of art, a cultural phenomenon, and a field of humanitarian knowledge, then, based on the data obtained, in the future it is possible to discuss specific working definitions with which the student will work throughout his scientific research. It can be "musical creativity", "artistic image", "cultural space of the city", "immersive environment", etc.

Next, it is necessary to identify the features of the formation and dynamics of the course of research using the compared methods (characteristics of the study (Table 2).): outline the field of research, set a goal, outline the main ways to achieve it (tasks or stages of research), assume what the research should come to in the final, and also determine the role of the subject in the study. Depending on the planned trajectory of the research, its goals and objectives, it will be possible to choose a specific method or propose its integrative forms.

A further in-depth comparison of the positions of structuralism and synergetics shows their common and different features, however, with regard to cultural phenomena and works of art, all the characteristics of these methods require a more detailed explanation, which occurs at the second stage.

The second stage consists meaningfully of determining the place of the considered methods in modern science, a brief historical reference (which can be expanded to a full-fledged historical excursion if there are enough hours), mentioning the main scientists who worked in line with these scientific paradigms, achievements in the field of aesthetics and philosophy of culture, analyzing the work of the toolkit on specific examples of classical texts and modern research, identification of the stages of the method and its results, determination of its strengths and weaknesses. In this article, the content of the second stage is presented concisely, with emphasis on the most significant aspects of the methods in the field of humanitarian issues.

Structural analysis

Structural analysis contributes to a deep and comprehensive study of a wide variety of phenomena: psychological, historical, social, cultural, etc. The structuralist methodology was used in the studies of culture by Y.M. Lotman, Claude Levi-Strauss, in psychology of the 1920s and 40s (Gestalt psychology), the history of science by M. Foucault, etc. The result of the application of the structuralist methodology is the building of a "structure", the identification of the hidden logic of the formation of socio-cultural or artistic integrity. Levi-Strauss applied structural methods to cultural anthropology, believing that all cultures have common structural elements. Jacques Lacan reinterpreted the ideas of psychoanalysis in the spirit of structuralism. Zh.Viet defined the structure as a model that meets the principles of integrity, self-regulation and orderly transformation. The phenomenon, form, and object under study are studied taking into account the variability within the specific limits of the historical, cultural, social, or artistic space in which their changes occur. Such different phenomena can be subjected to structural analysis today as an aesthetic education of students at the university ^[6] and urban planning ^[7].

The structural analysis of works of art was carried out by Max Dvorak, including in his work "The History of Art as the History of the Spirit" (Munich, 1924). He continued the development of structuralist analysis in relation to the study of art history in the 40s and 50s. Hans Zedlmayr. He noted that the primary and important focus in the entire research process is precisely on synthesis, and not on the decomposition of a literary text. At the same time, both the individuality of the work of art itself and the uniqueness of its perception are not leveled, but preserved and even emphasized. A comparative analysis of the work with others is allowed, but simplified classifications and generalized generalizations should be avoided. The formative focus of the work is precisely the smallest nuances of the unique and individual, the "original generative foundation". Research technique requires a creative act of re-creation, penetration into this sought-after focus: it is necessary to find the core of the work, its "living center" means to find the interconnection of all elements and their spiritualizing beginning. At the same time, the perceiver of the work turns out to be a co-creator, the work is recreated and comes to life in the soul of the perceiver.

The ontological status of a work is determined by its value, independent of the author's attitude towards it and of the viewer's perception. The inexhaustible ambiguity of the work becomes a value criterion. At the same time, structuralism does not accept interpretative multivariance, believing that there is one line of correct interpretation reflecting the uniqueness and uniqueness of an outstanding work, and otherwise the history of art would be impossible and meaningless. When interpreting a work of art, according to G.Zedelmayr, all parts and elements are explained based on the idea of the whole, which ultimately allows us to identify the correct version of the interpretation, when the whole is consistent with all the parts, and not only with individual Structural analysis is based on the principle that the whole is never equal to the sum of the elements of which it's folding. Comprehension of meaning is possible only in the context of the whole and the interaction of all elements. Alois Riegl, for example, thought of a work of art as "a specific orderliness peculiar only to a given phenomenon and bringing its internal and external measure into line" ^{[8, p. 13]}.

Excessive subjectivism and a subject-conceptual search of individual snatched elements from the work and the introduction of private "emotions" into it should be excluded from the analysis: first, the work itself should "speak" outside the means of terminology and technologies learned by the researcher. To do this, in order to avoid formal lifeless historicization, it is necessary to reveal the ultra-modern: "methods of structural analysis lead to the history of art in the proper sense of the word, to a rigorous science that can be combined with Gestalt theory and value approaches" ^{[9, pp.158-159]}.

Structuralism in aesthetics is aimed at discovering a symbolic integrity that remains stable during shape changes and other transformations. Y. Mukarzhovsky notes the dynamic integrity and internal balance of the structure: "the concept of structure is based on the internal unification of the whole through the mutual relations of its components, relations not only positive – balance and harmony, but also negative – contradictions and oppositions; thus, the understanding of structure is connected with dialectical thinking. The connections between the elements, precisely because of their dialectics, cannot be deduced from the concept of the whole, which is not a priori, but posteriori in relation to them, and their discovery requires not abstract speculation, but empiricism" ^{[10, p. 117]}. This means that the structural essence of art has a supra-individual character, determined by cultural traditions and norms, and does not consist in specific works, which is similar to the consistency of language. In general, from the standpoint of structuralism, art is considered as a communicative system, a symbolic activity.

The structural analysis method includes three main stages. At the first stage, the elements of the object or system under study are identified and determined, dividing them into segments. At the second stage, structural modeling of the object is carried out, hierarchical-level construction with a description of the relationships and interactions of its constituent elements. At the last stage, the reverse construction into an integral system is underway, the restoration of the object with the identification of its functioning and the rules for the mutual connection of parts into a whole. Of course, this is a simplified description. Between the initial and the last stage there is an important, maximally devoid of subjectivity, comprehension of the object or the system as a whole.

The structural analysis begins with a general overview of the system with a gradual transition to detail and the building of a hierarchical system with an increasing number of levels. The differentiation into abstraction levels usually occurs with a limitation of the number of components at each level. The structural analysis method makes it possible to overcome the complexity of large systems by dividing them into parts. Structural analysis is based on the principles of hierarchical ordering and consistency of structural levels. Thus, the structure within the framework of structuralism is considered as a system of relations of constituent elements. The methodological substantiation of the integrity of form and content is carried out through structuralist analysis. The formation and development of structuralism in aesthetics is due to the transition to the abstract-theoretical level of the study of art and the use of the concept of "structure" and related categories as the main methodological tool. The tasks of structural analysis include: identifying the intrastructural relationships of elements of artistic phenomena, building typologies of structures of their external functionality in various socio-cultural contexts, etc. For example, aesthetic consciousness as a phenomenon can also be studied within the framework of structuralism ^[11]. The structuralist approach has become most widespread in literature, architecture, and cinema. It has proved effective for the study of narrative structures and personnel and plot compositions in order to identify the effects of their influence on the viewer and reader: they are also considered as a system of signs.

In the aesthetics of the twentieth century, the structural method made it possible to develop strategies for a holistic understanding of creativity, myth, language, text, discourse, etc. ^[12]. The logical and methodological problem of structuralism has also become the question of the possibility of transferring methods and techniques from one science to another. Structuralists were attracted by the discovery of parameters of human existence independent of individual subjectivity and the possibility of substantiating knowledge about them. The scientific explanation was subjected to the autonomous or unconscious functioning of the sign-symbolic systems of culture from the subject. Structuralist analysis is characterized by abstraction from the material substrate of the studied cultural objects. Structuralism notes the objective dynamics of structures, the properties of their self-regulation, since structures are modified based on the action of their own principles, and not external forces. At the same time, the controversial point of structural analysis is the understanding of the non-structural within the framework of the structure, as well as the aspiration to consider art as a closed sign system, relatively independent of the surrounding reality.

Synergetic analysis

The synergetic research method, on the one hand, is based on the principles of mathematical modeling and subject research, on the other hand, it brings to the level of philosophical reflection such areas of knowledge that seemed very far from it (for example, physics, chemistry, astronomy). As a method of analytics, synergetics addresses the universal laws of development and self-organization, which are reflected in the processes of world history, social and cultural transformation ^[13], and stimulates the development of not only exact science, but also humanitarian research ^[14].

The synergetic method is close to systemic and structural analyses, as it addresses the subject of its research as a complex system and identifies its internal relationships. The very name "synergetics" comes from the Greek word "synergy", which means joint activity. However, the emergence of synergetics as a science and a scientific approach is by no means connected with humanitarian research, but with discoveries in the field of exact sciences (I.Prigozhin, G. Haken, G.G. Malinetsky, S.P. Kapitsa, S.P. Kurdyumov, etc.) The synergetic approach to the analysis of art was applied by A.V. Voloshinov, I.A. Evin, etc.

Art, the field of culture, like all other phenomena, is considered by synergetics as complex dynamic systems with such qualities as: uncertainty, integrity, nonlinearity, coherence, openness. Also, any system is unstable, going through stages of chaos and order in its development, as well as a state of bifurcation (polyfurcation). The processes taking place in any complex system, whether it is the creation and interpretation of a work of art, socio–cultural or historical processes, synergetics suggests considering from the perspective of analyzing complex systems. For example, synergetic analysis and fractal modulation make it possible to detect the order of text systems previously hidden from the researcher ^[15]. It also allows us to see the basic principle of communication processes, which are considered as constantly developing, changing open systems that exchange information, matter, and energy with the external environment ^[16]. As soon as the exchange process stops and the system becomes closed, its degradation or even death will begin from that moment. This exchange with the external environment cannot be artificially regulated, unless we are talking about laboratory experience. The most productive way to change a living system is to influence the environment in which this system develops: it is necessary to change the external conditions and the system will begin to adapt to them, changing and showing new, hitherto hidden qualities.

The rigid principle of determinism that reigned in science in the twentieth century is already being questioned in the XXI century, because the description of any system cannot be limited by known parameters, there will always be something that we do not yet know – this is the essence of the position of uncertainty. At the same time, all these dynamic systems, be it a city, a cultural space, a theater group, are capable of self–regulation, self-organization and self-development. For a long time, the principle of determinism, as well as the binary nature in the analysis of the subject of research, have not been questioned. The binary approach gave science methods such as analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, but in the twentieth century, a new understanding of the system as a developing dynamic education forced science to switch to multidimensional analysis schemes. The fact is that any binary oppositions do not correspond to the changing complexity of any system, simplify it, deprive it of individuality and lead to a wrong view of the entire system as a whole.

The synergetic method offers a new structural unit – the triad. Modern philosophers propose it as a universal semantic formula that can be applied to both natural science and humanities research. The simplest examples are: the three basic colors of the palette (red, blue, yellow), levels of cognition (sensations, feelings, mind), the classical triad of values: Beauty-Goodness-Truth, human image: Spirit-Soul-Body; stages of life: Development-Flourishing-Destruction. Each of these elements is in balance with the others, complementing them, and regulating their relationships. Thus, in the model of cultural events, a person is an obligatory participant in this triad: the description of his aesthetic experience, emotions, and creativity also requires a synergetic approach capable of combining universal and unique interaction with works of art in each specific case ^[17].

Developing, any system comes into an unstable state over time, becoming more and more unstable – because it is changing itself, its habitat and the nature of their interaction are changing. As a result, it comes to the so-called "bifurcation point" (polyfurcation), in which it can change the direction of its development. This process is associated with the appearance of an attractor – a target that begins to "attract" the system. As a rule, we are talking about the development option that best meets the new goals of the system if it strives to survive. If there is no such goal, then as a result of the crisis, the system will begin the process of folding, degradation, dying: the laws of entropy (approaching a state of equilibrium) no one has canceled and the undeveloped system will sooner or later slow down and stop. Remarkably, synergetic philosophers draw parallels between the development of the universe, where the processes of development of systems, crises, self-organization and entropy are observed at the level of life of stars, and the same processes occurring in the human community: culture, society and personality, losing their purpose and unable to reach a new level of development, degrade and complete their historical existence. At the same time, any system can be reborn by forming new structures and launching update processes. Interestingly, the state of rest, balance, and relative well-being of the system are considered temporary and not the most positive. Any prolonged calm state leads to simplification and death of the system.

The crisis, the state of chaos is perceived not as a disaster and catastrophe, but as a stage of development, the ability of the system to change, overcoming accumulated internal contradictions, acquire new qualities and reach the next stage of its development more adapted to the changed environment. In crisis moments of development, the role of random events, secondary phenomena, which can have a decisive impact on the entire further course of events, increases. At this point, another quality of the system's development manifests itself – non-linearity, previously known to us as the "transition of quantity into quality". This moment is associated with the sudden appearance of new, hitherto non-existent qualities in the system. This position is extremely important for a positive interpretation of the "crises" of art or the development of society ^[18].

Another important characteristic of any system is consistency. Integrity is not a mechanical, formal sum of elements, loosely connected or not at all connected to each other, but an organic unity. At the same time, the researchers argue that it is impossible to comprehend the integrity of the object under study in a logical way, it is comprehended only intuitively, partly through aesthetic perception or mystical experience. In general, there may be parts that at first glance contradict each other. But with proper study, there will always be elements that balance and regulate these contradictions. The latter are removed due to such a phenomenon as coherence – the coordinated flow of any processes in the system. When any element in the system is changed, the changes affect the entire system, it changes as a whole. For example, qualitative criteria and aesthetic characteristics of images in the process of electronic ranking of mobile photos can be combined into a single system due to this synergetic approach ^[19].

The principles of synergetics help to explore nature, culture and society and the processes taking place in them as complex self-organizing systems; to see opportunities in times of crisis, to perceive contradictions as a necessary "engine" of progress ^[20]. For example, one can even talk about "the "constants" and "variables" of modern university education as a self-organizing system" ^[21].

For all the successes of synergetics, it is necessary to note its contradictions ^[22]. The phenomenon of self-organization and its description became a breakthrough in the science of the twentieth century, but even if the mechanisms of this self-organization became known, it is still not clear what triggers them. What synergetics defines as a random factor, for example, in the history of state development, many other studies define as a pattern. At the same time, the role of personality in history is not minimized and the possibility of individual choice remains. Nevertheless, the logic of the development of large systems – ethnic groups, states, cultures – is free from the private interests of individuals and goes beyond their will and influence. Rather, specific personalities become the embodiment of patterns of historical development.

Synergetics, claiming to be inclusive, has been used in interdisciplinary research ^[23]. Many of her postulates help to explain the work of the brain, the psyche, social processes, the laws of art and its perception. Mathematical methods of research, exact sciences, would seem to be inapplicable to the "products of the activity of the human spirit." However, both domestic and foreign thinkers repeatedly turn to the search for numerical values of harmony, perception of colors, musical tones, artistic images, which can be analyzed not metaphorically, but with the help of differentiated terms of exact sciences, to reveal and study the morphology of aesthetic feeling ^[24]. On the one hand, it reveals and helps to understand the peculiarities of creativity and the construction of an artistic image ^[25], on the other hand, it reveals the ontological foundations of cognition, human exploration of reality and the world as such.

Summing up the second stage, it is necessary to emphasize the thematic diversity of research conducted using the methods under consideration, the regularity of their results, as well as the contribution of syneregetics and structuralism as scientific paradigms to the development of humanitarian knowledge and cultural practices.

At the third stage, a comparative analysis of the methods is carried out. Their comparison indicates their possible complementary nature. If structural analysis provides a reliable methodological basis for studying the stable connections and interactions of the system under consideration, then the synergetic approach reveals its dynamic aspects, such as the ability to self–organize and transition to new qualitative states.

In the context of the increasing importance of interdisciplinary research, there is inevitably an urgent need for tools capable of providing a comprehensive study of complex systems. And here the combination of structural analysis and synergetics opens up additional opportunities for integrative understanding of phenomena, allowing not only to decompose the studied system into its constituent elements, but also to identify the mechanisms of internal structural organization taking into account their dynamic characteristics. This allows us to cover a number of factors affecting the states of stability and variability, the processes of ordering and chaoticization, the dynamics of the structure-processality pair within the framework of a single research approach.

Structural analysis, focusing on the stable relationships and functional organization of the system, provides a comprehensive understanding of its static aspects. This approach is ideal for identifying and classifying system elements, their functions and relationships, forming the basis for subsequent analysis of the processality. Synergetics, exploring the conditions of the emergence and development of the identified structure, provides tools for analyzing the processes of evolution and adaptation of the system under study. The properties of nonlinearity, coevolution, self-organization, and the phenomenon of bifurcation moments belong to the subject field of synergetics, which allows us to identify the factors that generate the processes of dynamic transformation of states.

Thus, the synthetic combination of structural analysis and synergetics provides an integrative approach suitable for the study of states of stability – variability of complex systems, organically continuing the current vector of modern research work, emphasizing the interrelationships and the processality of the studied phenomena.

Nevertheless, the choice of the methodology of structural analysis, synergetics or their integrative combination in the practice of research work should be based on the specific goals of the study and the essential characteristics of its subject area. It is important to keep in mind that each of these approaches has its own unique advantages and may be more effective in certain contexts.

So, if the purpose of the study is to identify and analyze the nodal elements of the system and their interrelationships, structural analysis will provide a detailed examination of the internal structure of the object, whether it is social networks, literary texts or biological structures. If necessary, to build complex taxonomic structures within the framework of a specific study, it allows you to effectively organize information, ensuring the correct typologization of elements.

On the other hand, if the research is aimed at understanding the processes of self-organization and the dynamic states of the system under study, a synergetic approach is preferable. Similarly, in studies of the fields of nonlinear interactions and emergence, synergetic analysis will be a methodologically correct choice.

However, the purpose of the study may also be a comprehensive understanding of the object, which inevitably requires an analysis of both the structure and its dynamic aspects in all the complexity of their interrelations. With such a goal setting, an integrative approach is necessary, since it allows us to explore specific areas of intersection of static and dynamic characteristics that cause such processes in complex systems as, for example, phase transition.

As an example of a research task involving just such a complex understanding of the object, a procedural sequence can be given aimed at revealing and correctly interpreting the semantic layers of the text: "The program for identifying "non-obvious", hypothetical content can be reduced to three interrelated evaluation procedures: a) attribution of the material in question as a specially organized semantic unity, that is, a full-fledged text with an internal structure; b) the establishment of the cultural code through which this text was created; c) subsequent substantive interpretation in the "language" of the original" ^{[26, pp. 130-131]}. The procedure for identifying the internal structure of the text can be performed using the methodology of structural analysis, the stage of establishing the cultural code is performed in this number using a synergetic approach, since it allows taking into account the dynamics of changes in the contextual framework. The interpretation procedure in this case will be methodologically determined by the integrative application of the described approaches.

Conclusions

The described methodological approach does not aim to eliminate all problems in teaching the methodology of humanitarian research, but is an effective part of a comprehensive solution to this problem, helping to bridge the gap between theory and practice. It is valuable for the reason that it involves active interaction of students with the material under study, clarifies the procedures for data verification, taking into account the specifics of each of the approaches used. A specific and simple algorithm that leads the process of cognition from simple to complex, as well as a significant number of living examples taken from modern research, make the material presented in this article easily applicable in teaching and shaping the research activity of students. The methodological innovation was presented using the example of structural and synergetic analyses, but it is easy to extrapolate it to other research methods.

It is important to emphasize that methodological variability in itself stimulates a creative approach to solving scientific problems, when the object of research is necessarily viewed from different angles, while simultaneously developing the habit of a holistic, systematic view of the problem under study. It is also important that when choosing a complex composite methodology, the researcher discovers the problematic field of occasionality and determinism, the contours of which are outlined more and more clearly with a deepening understanding of how various elements of the system interact with each other and how the dynamics of one part can affect the entire system as a whole.

Summing up, it should be noted that the approach based on a conscious combination of research methods can play a significant role in the development of scientific thinking, enriching the academic process and contributing to the personal and professional development of the researcher. This combination not only forms the basis for a systematic understanding of scientific criteria and an accessible methodological arsenal, but also ensures readiness for non-standard solutions to newly emerging research tasks, adapting to the realities of a rapidly changing scientific landscape.