Proceedings of the International scientific and practical conference ―New York Global Science Conference 2026‖ (May 18-20, 2026) / Publisher website: www.naukainfo.com. – New York, USA, 2026. - 322 p.

204 signifying metonymic chain — a complexly articulated desire to agree); they possess immense substantive value. In any case, Q. Meillassoux has managed to develop a conceptual apparatus that makes it possible to formulate absolutizing claims about the world on the basis of (at least) the transfinite entities of G. Cantor’s set theory. It should be said that the author does not speak of the problem as definitively resolved, but rather indicates a path for further philosophical research. 3. Q. Meillassoux problematizes the notion of fideism, which has become established in contemporary philosophical thought as the hegemonic form of the ―strong model‖ of correlationism [2, p. 48] . Fideism is identical with radical voluntarism and with the incoherence of absolutizing designations. The primacy of fideistic belief gives rise to specific forms of fanatical conviction in local absolutes that do not presuppose rigorous grounding or logical argumentation. However, fideism should not be placed in the category of relativist particular ontologies from the standpoint of criticism and decisive rejection. In the final analysis, every subjective experience of desire is a form of fideism, even if it consists — and this creates a recursive problem of repetition — in the negation of fideism (we shall return to this in point 6). It is precisely correlationist fideism that makes it possible to establish the correspondence between sign and jouissance, that is, to confer upon the impossible Real the character of the absolutely possible within the corporeally mediated act of ontological verbal inference. The problematic of the ―strong model‖ does not merely invest the absolute with the status of the death drive; it also allows an epistemic community to arise around the signifiers (representatives of the drive) pertaining to this drive, namely those who believe in the validity of the absolute beyond correlation. What is at issue is belief in a contingent absolute that may remain in a state of mentally ordered unity, and the same thesis is easily applicable to the act of truth-presentation in J. Lacan’s psychoanalysis (as compared with linguistic textual forms of the infinite re-presentation of truth). The only difference is that psychoanalysis does not turn away from its correlationist foundations, whereas Q. Meillassoux insists on anticorrelationism and access to ―being beyond the human.‖