Dialogues on/in the field of meanings: to the 120th anniversary of Alexey Nikolayevich Leontiev

Abstract

Background. The paper is associated with the 120th anniversary of the birt of Alexey Nikolaevich Leontiev, acknowledged classic of the world psychology. This anniversary of the founder of a scientific school in psychology and of the department of psychology at Moscow State University has given rise to reflections on the “task for meaning” of Leontiev’s personality, his theory and its modern implementations. Objective. The study is a professional reflection on the importance of A.N. Leontiev’s personality and his activity theory approach for the psychological science of these days as well as the explication of meanings implied in the special thematic issue of this journal. Results. “The field of meanings” associated with A.N. Leontiev is being revealed through the analysis of cultural-historical, life and scientific contexts. The intertwined lines of A.N. Leontiev’s life activity are singled out: the scientific one (a fundamental theory, suggesting a holistic concept of human being), the social one (restoring intellectual environment), and the closely connected to the latter, emotional one (creating a specific “field of tension” which attracted colleagues toward this intellectual environment and generated a specific university atmosphere of freedom and diverse new ideas at the department of psychology at MSU. Dialogues and interactions of the activity theory approach with some theoretical approaches of our days are explicated. Conclusion. Having much in common with more recent approaches, A.N. Leontiev’s approach is a polisemantic one. This fact may serve as an explanation to the plurality of its interpretations in the present-day contexts within psychological science. The approach remains a significant resource of answers to the questions posed in psychology today, many decades after its creator passed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.