Klironomical Methods for the Study of Cultural Heritage: From Philosophical Reconstruction to Applied Analysis

Abstract

The relevance of the study is determined by the need for a methodological renewal of cultural heritage research in the context of the expansion of the subject field of heritage studies and the increasing attention to intangible forms of culture, memory, and cultural continuity. Contemporary practices of cultural preservation require instruments capable of linking philosophical reflection with applied analysis and managerial decision-making. The study problem is associated with the fragmentation of the methodological apparatus of heritage studies, the dominance of normative–procedural models, and the insufficient elaboration of the philosophical foundations of value, historicity, and responsibility in the analysis of tangible and intangible cultural heritage. This limits the explanatory potential of existing approaches and their ability to address the processual nature of cultural continuity. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the systematisation of klironomical methods for the study of cultural heritage and in the substantiation of klironomy as an integral methodological system that brings together philosophical, analytical, and applied levels of analysis. For the first time, a set of 25 klironomical methods is presented, and their applicability to tangible and intangible heritage is demonstrated within a unified methodological logic. The subject of the study is klironomical methods for analysing the processes of preservation of culture and art. The object of the study comprises the processes of preserving tangible and intangible cultural heritage as forms of historical continuity. The study aims to substantiate klironomical methods as a methodological transition from philosophical reconstruction to applied analysis of cultural heritage. The methodological framework of the study is based on philosophical reconstruction, categorical and axiological analysis, comparative-klironomical and matrix analysis, as well as methods of klironomical diagnostics, expertise, and design. The study generalises the ideas and approaches of J. Assmann, A. Assmann, P. Ricœur, P. Nora, F. Choay, L. Smith, R. Harrison, and other scholars of the philosophy of memory and heritage studies, as well as the author’s klironomical concept. The essence of the study consists in identifying the philosophical foundations of klironomical methods, critically analysing the methodological limitations of heritage studies, and developing an integral system of methods for analysing the preservation of culture. It is demonstrated how the philosophical categories of value, canon, and historicity are consistently translated into analytical and applied research instruments for the study of cultural heritage. Particular attention is paid to the differences and interrelations between tangible and intangible heritage within the klironomical approach. The author concludes that klironomical methods constitute an independent methodological system that ensures both philosophical depth and applied applicability in the analysis of cultural heritage, and confirms the validity of klironomy as a methodological bridge between the philosophy of culture and the practices of preserving culture and art.