The article challenges the correctness of narratives, so to speak, of “radical ontologism”, which seeks to turn ontology into a special (main) one a «part» of philosophy that rises above all others. Such narratives are qualified as a line of hyper-materialism, which is a modern form of naive materialism. His claims to be a conductor of genuine monism, objectivity and scientific character are very problematic. In fact, this ontological line is eclectic, logically contradictory and is a definite step back in the development of the classical traditions of scientific and philosophical interpretation of the relationship between consciousness and matter. Thus, the soul in modern hyper-materialistic views is declared a “part of the
body” that does not have its own content and being. In contrast to the paradigm of narrow ontologism, the author of the article defends and consistently develops the idea that all philosophy is ontology in its content. This means that philosophical ontology is a reflection of reality (being) in its integrity. Not only the material, but also the spiritual is truly real (not illusory), despite its immateriality. Ontological and philosophical content has two main forms of expression — epistemological and axiological. The levels of ontological content can be different: not only extremely general (integral), as in philosophy, but also «regional» (general scientific and specifically scientific, general artistic, etc.).
For citation: Bulychev I.I. Philosophy in the format of content and form, Ivanovo State University Bulletin, Series: Humanities, 2025, iss. 1, pp. 125—131.