Information on the thesis

Dissertation  for  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Sciences  in  Philosophy,  speciality
09.00.03  –  Social  Philosophy  and  Philosophy  of  History.  –  Lviv  National  University
named after Ivan Franko, Lviv 2015.
The  concept  of  everydayness  has  not  been  developed  enough  in    the  Ukrainian
social  philosophy  and  social  sciences,  but  the  exploration  of  everydayness  has  a  long
tradition  from  E.  Husserl  and  M.  Heidegger  to  Michel  de  Certeau  and  B.  Waldenfels.
Everydayness is  sense-making basis for a human being because  he/she discovers in it the
sense of his/her own life, construes sociality and builds the relations with others. Today we
see  the  growth  of  the  interest  to  everydayness  in  the  context  of  pragmatic  turn  in  social
philosophy, especially in  social phenomenology.  A human being is not isolated  Cartesian
subject, enclosed in his/her own thinking, or transcendental subject of idealistic philosophy.
After Heidegger’s and Sartre’s research a human being is considered as being-in-the-world:
to be in the world means to be in the everydayness.
Everydayness  is  very  changeable,  unstable  and  concrete  form  of  a  human  life.
Those characteristics of everyday life do not allow conceptualize it entirely. But today  there
are some partial theories of everyday life. In the focus of this dissertation there are such  the
best  developed  partial  theories,  their  elements  and  principles  of  research.  The  author
considers theoretical and methodological bases of everyday life’s research, the emergence of
everyday life as the form of a human being in the historical retrospectivity (from Ancient to
Postmodernity). The author stresses that the best methodology of exploring everydayness is
the  complex  methodology  which  includes  transcendental,  phenomenological,  hermeneutic
methods  and  the  method  of  deconstruction.  Such  complex  methodology allows  exploring
the  phenomenon  of  everyday  live  more  completely.  The  well  developed  theories  of
everydayness contain such elements as: body, self (Me), time, house, habit,  repetitiveness,
other and others. In this dissertation those elements have been deeply analyzed. On the basis
of such analysis the author has concluded that the structure of everydayness consists of  the
mentioned above elements. Some of those elements are spatial (body and house),  temporal
(repetitiveness), social (self, other and others) and psychological (habit). Hence the structure
of everydayness has spatial, temporal, social and psychological characteristics. It does not
exist as givenness. It is the result of a human being activity.
On the basis of the analysis of everydayness’ elements we can also distinguish  its
significant characteristics: 1) everyday life is bodily oriented, 2) everyday life practices  are
based on common sense which makes its pragmatic and utilitarian, 3) everyday life is based
on repetitive actions and habits which transform it into the familiar surrounding, 4) everyday
life  is  the  sphere  of  known.  The  analysis  of  everydayness’  theories  has  shown  the
significance  of  theoretical  and  methodological  heritage  of  the  representatives  of  the
phenomenology  and  transcendental  phenomenology,  but  phenomenological  and
transcendental  theories  are  still  incomplete  and  one-sided.  Therefore  the  author  has  also
concentrated on the philosophy of dialogue which allows deconstructing the transcendental
limits of everydayness.
In  this  dissertation  the  analysis  of  partial  theories  of  everyday  life  and  concrete
exploration  of  phenomenon  of  everyday  life  are  combined  with  the    meta-theoretical
approach to everyday life. Such meta-theoretical approach could be named consciousness of
everyday life’s consciousness. It helps to understand everyday life as the real unity of object
and  subject,  when  a  researcher  realizes  how  clichés,  schemes,  habits,  and  customs  are
produced.  The  meta-theoretical  approach  also  helps  to  eliminate  objectivism  and
subjectivism  of  the  previous  theories.  On  the  basis  of  the  meta-theoretical  approach  the
author has developed a meta-theory of everyday life beyond objectivism and  subjectivism,
which is named as the meta-theory of dynamic equilibrium of life-world in its  poly-subject
sociality. Such sociality included the dynamics of ontic practices, based on repetitions,  and
dynamics  of  ontological  practices,  based  on  changes  and  innovations.  In  poly-subject
sociality a human being realized himself/herself not only as Me, as the centre of objected
world, but also as existence in its dynamics, which longs for freedom and miraculous,  longs
for creative relations with others.
Keywords:  everyday  life,  elements  of  everyday  life,  intentionality,  ontic,
ontological,  sociality,  the  structure  of  everyday  life,  dynamic  equilibrium  of  everyday
life/life world.