Abstract
The article discusses the definition of reflection as an activity and examines the main factors that determine the kinds of reflection. According to the author of the article, reflection as an activity can be defined by the following formula: the direction of attention to EXPERIENCE for the “detection” of its FORMS and their fixation by means of certain SEMIOTIC TOOLS carried out for the sake of achieving some PURPOSE. In this formulation, the terms “experience”, “form”, “semiotic tools”, “purpose” are understood as parameters, the specification of which sets the description of certain kinds of reflection. In addition, the structure of “detection” participates in the formation of reflection, which consists of the languages of description, conceptual and terminological apparatus, knowledge and other conceptual means of the reflecting subject. Variants for specifying the parameters of the definition are considered in the article on the material of various philosophical techniques (mainly domestic tradition) and a number of general cultural reflexive practices. The author correlates his understanding of reflection with a number of ideas of the Moscow Methodological Circle (MMC), in which reflection techniques were given great importance. In particular, the author schematizes his understanding as a special case of an “act of activity”, the idea of which is the development within the MMC of some of K. Marx’s ideas. In connection with the clarification of the temporal structure of reflection (which is not grasped by schematization of reflection as an act of activity), the author introduces the idea of an elementary cycle of reflection and fixes it in the form of a scheme. In conclusion, the author examines the question of the correlation of reflection and thinking and considers the possibilities of correlating his definition of reflection with the typology of reflection set by the scheme of the thinking-communication-activity-system (proposed in MMC in 1983).