Understanding Man in the Modern Academic Philospohy after the Marginalist Revolution

The article is devoted to the topical subject of the dynamics of the transformation of worldview and methodological paradigm of man and society understanding, stemming from the marginalist revolution of the late 19th century. This revolution determined a methodological turn to searching for subjective fundamentals of economic behavior and the focus shift from cost to economic performance. The novelty of this study lies in establishing the theoretical significance of such a transition for modern philosophical anthropology. Accordingly, the purpose of the study is to determine the specifics of the changes that the marginalist revolution in economic science brought to the doctrine of man, associated with the characteristics of their social behavior and a new vision of the foundations of social psychology. To do this, it was necessary to solve such problems as, 1) the reconstruction of evolution and the identification of the fundamental principles of the classical (the so-called Marxist) economic-centric model of man; 2) establishing the main directions for revising these principles within the framework of the new paradigm; 3) explication and conceptual analysis of ideological and methodological innovations that the marginalist revolution entailed; 4) a conceptual justification for the prospects of the ideological and methodological paradigm, the core of which is the modernized model of economic man. The study used the method of categorical analysis with elements of discourse analysis. A critical examination of the classical Marxist ideological and methodological paradigm in understanding man and society made it possible to identify the main features that have been revised in the new model. As a result of the study, it was established that the marginalist revolution led to a conceptual rejection of methodological holism, the substantial approach, and the concept of equivalent exchange, substantiating the heuristic value of the principles of individualism, anti-substantialism and unequal exchange. In fact, in this way an understanding of man and society was finally formed, considering the concept of the formation of individual wills on a new scientific basis. The logically impeccable justification for this concept belongs to K. Menger, who was able to resolve the paradox of methodological individualism by showing why this concept does not necessarily lead to an understanding of economic exchange as deception. As a result, the limited understanding of modern domestic Marxism as a purely economic theory is revised, the costs of the classical Marxist understanding of man are shown, and the need to include ideas of a new understanding of economic man, transformed as a result of the marginalist revolution, into the philosophical and anthropological theory is justified.