Classic of Russian philosophy Alexandr I. Vvedensky proposed a definition of metaphysics as a study of true reality contrary to apparent one. This definition seems to be useful in contemporary issues. It's an apt definition because it describes an ancient metaphysics as good as classical tradition and concerns allbranches of the philosophical knowledge. A number of philosophical subjects are connected with the difference of true and apparent reality as their foundation. For instance, Philosophical Anthropology differentiates between real and formal personal existence. Epistemology discusses a problem of a criterion of real existence and notes that any language does not contain such internal criterion. The Philosophy of science analyses a conventional reality created by people, and so does the Philosophy of art. Social and Political Philosophy due to understand a nature of special phenomena which have no substance but are real and objective. Finally, contemporary Philosophy of technology concentrates on the virtual reality as a special kind of existence. So, the problem of the distinction between true and apparent reality manifests itself in all philosophical disciplines, and this fact determines a major meaning of the metaphysics in the philosophy.

The metaphysics of a social reality assumes definition ontology various plans of its realization as sorts of attitude to kinds. The last ones represent phenomena of a social reality - as classical and nonclassical. The economy, morals, religion, the right concern to classical kinds of a social reality. Attributes of a sociality of the given kinds: activity, attitudes, forms of social consciousness. A nonclassical kinds given attributes yet "do not possess" to the full. Their metaphysics is defined through parity with classical kinds of society. The structure of a social reality is mobile that is why "updating" of the list of classical kinds of a social reality is not soproblematic that is why the urgency of an explication ontology and metaphysics of a sort of a reality social and numerous kinds is undoubtedly rather productive and duly.

The subject of author’s reflection is transformation of metaphysics in creativity of I. Kant and an opportunity of faith on the basis of new existential ontology. It begins from opportunity developing of new metaphysics in the works of Kant and then – Heidegger. There is a problem in understanding of metaphysics in Kant’s art. From author’s point of view Kant tried to create a new type of ontology as a real metaphysics that doesn’t destroy the faith if one understands it non-metaphysically. Even more – Kant’s and Heidegger’s new ontology can produce and have already produced a new type of faith understanding. This transcendental and aprioristic faith is the inner essence of different faiths, which objected in religions. Nowadays this faith must be opened and rethought,because it can helps to solve global spiritual problems of mankind. Only real (ontological) and humanistic knowledge can spiritually unite persons and peoples.

The European metaphysics begins with opening by Parmenid a metaphysical reality of the Uniform in its difference from a physical reality of the Much. This sets its first border and defines the ontological modus of the metaphysics, developed in the Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Thinkers of New time occupy a reflectiveposition in the relation of antiquity’s asking “WHAT is the metaphysics?”. They interest no longer the fact of the presence of the metaphysics, but the bases of this fact — transcendental conditions of its possibility (resp. a question “How is metaphysics possible?”). If the Antiquity (Parmenid) considers metaphysics as the reality of an empirical subject, then Kant raises the question about the possibility of metaphysics as the activities of a transcendental subject. There is the second boundary of metaphysics, which transforms in its epistemological modus. The transcendental method becomes the criterion of the metaphysics: it makes possible to critic the metaphysics and to limit its claims. The new metaphysics (XXI c.) occupies the reflexive position to the epistemological modus of metaphysics. It attempts to reveal its basic “figure of silence”, i.e. the transcendental conditions of the transcendental subject. The bases of the transcendental subject are the natural capability of human reason to fall outside the boundaries of experience (metaphysica naturalis; Kant) and the language. The metaphysica naturalis can be correlated with Husserl’s intentionality, but its prototype is the Leibnitz’s monad. The question “How is homo metaphysics possible?” is determining for the anthropological modus of metaphysics of XXI century.

The new world outlook paradigm of creativity correlates with the fundamental principles of metaphysics and modern natural science. The essential programs of development of science have been formed in Antiquity as the metaphysical principles. For example – principle of continuity VS principle of discreteness of matter;movement as God’s first impulse VS movement as natural attribute of matter. In the field of metaphysics were elaborated the very impotent concepts of modern science – matter, movement, force, atom, corpuscle, energy and others (M. Wartofsky, J. Agassi). Nowadays philosophers and scientists discuss such metaphysical principles as so called antropic principle (S. Hawking, B. Carter); the deep expediency and harmony of physical laws (I. Rosental, Y. Linnick); the principle of synergy and self – organization of nature (I. Prigojin, H. Haken). All these principles may be united in the new metaphysical idea of informational matrix of Universe.

The Frankfort school philosophers also denied an industrial society and its labor ethics in their struggle against Americans future so called Fourths Reich. E. Fromms mistake was in his idea that drugs and sex counter-culture is a weapon against technotronic and non-tolerant western society. In reality Frankfort school philosophy organized a cybernetic project «Man - Machine» with an aim to reorganize humanity. It was obvious to authors that computer will soon replace human brain. Firstly, some classified military projects lead to cultural paradigm shift and the emergence of postindustrial society as an epoch of new dark ages. This society suggests global psychoprogrammating and total supervising. People are to live in the new world of electronic devices and a road to this world was opened by a cybernetic project «Man-Machine». The legalization of drugs is the final point of postindustrial society victory.

1.Философская мысль ХХI века постепенно преодолевает часто встречающееся смешение двух понятий. С одной стороны,ЭстетическиЭпистемическое как феномен с ведущей ролью "Эпистемического" по отношению к "Эстетическому", что характерно, прежде всего, для традиционных представлений "Западной Культуры". А с другой, ЭпистемическиЭстетическому, соответственно, наоборот, присущ стиль,стимулирующий лишь “растущую варваризацию самого эмоционального состояния, становящегося чистым бурлением предоставленного самому себе чувства”. 2. На основе данного различия проводится сравнительное переосмысливание философских идей М.Хайдеггера и Ж.Бодрийяра с позиций сегодняшнего дня. На трёх разных для каждого, но сравнимых по основным достижениям, этапах творческой деятельности указанных ведущих мыслителей на грани ХХ и ХХI веков: Раннем, Среднем и Позднем. 3. Применительно к идеям модерна, постмодерна и постмодернизма в мире ХХI века сталкиваются два подхода, правда, амбивалентных, но всё же явно противостоящих друг другу. Для М.Хайдеггера главное – это «введение опоры на «эстетическое, но всё же при сохранении эпистемческого в качестве основы». Для Ж.Бодрийяра, наоборот, главное – это «введение в качестве основы «эстетического», но всё же при сохранении некоторой опоры на «Эпистемческое. 4. Появляется возможность выявить и философски переосмыслить с позиций XXI века проблему Интенсификации Эстетизации Эпистемического, или, в более решительной форме, неуклонного Наступления «ЭстетическиЭпистемологического » на « ЭпистемологическиЭстетическое ».

This article is devoted to the crisis of the modern philosophy caused by the generally accepted approach towards the ontology issues of existence and the ways to solve these problems. Before Kant’s theory the fundamental principle of the universe organization in the ontology was the determination of the existence as the number of objects that were independent from the subject and explored as they were. Kant showed then that the subject deals only with the images of its own conscience. The existence became not the thing-initself, but the thing, that opens to the human mind. But this experience gave no answer to the question about the differences between the immanent perceptions of conscience and the universe itself. This article reveals that the transition from the understandingof things as independent existing objects toward the understanding of their subjective origin as objects themselves demands more radical conclusions. These conclusions consist of that fact that the ontology should concentrate more exploring existence as the unformed organic whole and not to forget about its general problems and presentations about the conscience. Currently we can get nonverbal knowledge about the existence itself and take steps of getting verbal one. Separation of the existence as the unformed organic whole from the presentations of conscience prevents from mistake of determining the things created by the subject in the process of universe perception as its attributes (the plurality of interpretations turns into the ontology pluralism).

The paper «Situation as concrete entity» dedicated to ontological opposition of abstract being and concrete being. Main idea of this paper – situation as concrete being was rejected, ignored by philosophic and religious systems for thousands of years, because situation was associated with false being, being of things (Plato), life distress, illusion (Hinduism, Buddhism). But culture of XX century includes «reanimation» of situation as concrete being by existentialphilosophy and modern art, and now we can speak about new approach to problem of human being, practice and cognition – situative method. This approach has high humanitarian potential and wide perspectives of development.

Профессор кафедры Философии для естественных факультетов Философского факультета Московского Государственного Университета им. М.В.Ломоносова, Россия 1. Представления о субъективном характере Власти «этого человека» «теперь-и-здесь», а тем более властных структурГосударства, являются Иллюзиями. К концу ХХ века, при стремлении «схватить» растворённое в субъективном объективное (и наоборот), возникает потребность переосмыслить Субъективно-Объективный характер «онтологической основы Власти», и, соответственно, понимание онтологичности Смерти как Объективно-Субъективного процесса, а также различное понимание сути и роли диапазона «от Рождения-Жизни к Смерти» для «этого человека» «теперь-и-здесь». 2. В XXI веке складывается ситуация, когда оказывается возможным как бы возврат кисторически предшествующему ходу мысли: «от Смерти к Жизни-Рождению». "Смерть как Жизнь", а не "Жизнь как Смерть". 3. В пределах противостояния идеологии христианства и радикального исламизма, в ХХI веке, возникла потребность в переосмысливании соотношения «Власти как онтологической основы Смерти» и «Смерти как онтологической основы Власти». В частности, о возможном как бы «превалировании», надостаточно больших этапов времени, одной из сторон или их относительной «паритетности».4. В рамках исламских конфессий появились течения, которые культивируют понимание Смерти как онтологической основы Власти» как бы «в перевернутом виде». Сознательно идущие на массовуюсмерть террористы, видят в ней средство позволяющее, в соответствии с предполагаемыми идеалами, подтолкнуть общество к установлению иной власти. Более резко проявилась исходная двойственность фанатической фаталистичности авраамических религиозных конфессий, особенно ислама. 5. На сегодняшний день лишь в теории Смерть могла бы перестать быть онтологической основой власти, если господствующейстала бы другая онтологическая основа Власти – «чисто духовная Идея». Мир прежней Власти в той или иной степени оказался бы против неё бессилен. XXI век даёт примеры соответствующих «больших флуктуаций», но изменить «онто» он не в состоянии. Источником глобальных изменений и катастроф является «этот человек» «теперь-и-здесь» как специфическая "искусственная природа", изменить искусственность которой нельзя, не уничтожив самого человека. XXI век требует переосмысление реальных интенций действий людей, оказавшихся "вывернутыми наизнанку", а также существенно преобразующихся «предмета Философии» и собственно «Философствования».

The author of the paper ascertains that in the treatment of material beginning of the world two opposed methods of approach had grown up: qualitative and quantitative ones. The first can be traced back to Miletus school. The other goes to Pythagorean philosophy. The qualitative treatment (Aristotelian one in the main) predominated from the fourth century B.C. to early XVII A.D. But from the second part of the XVII age and right up to our days the quantitative approach plays prevalent role not in philosophy only, but also in exact natural sciences. The author supposes that these two approaches don’t exclude, but compensate each other, and no one of them should dominate. Both methods can resolve own epistemological tasks. Unfortunately, from I.Newton, quantitative approach has prevailed in natural sciences. Ignoring qualitative method, scientists (especially of nowodays) try to resolve the epistemological problems of cognition natural phenomena with its help. As a result arbitrary formal mathematical theories come into existence. Such conceptions create only semblance of resolution theproblem. Among them the author reckons for example the Large Burst theory, based on the model of enlarging universe and also the theory of planetary model of atom.In the paper author refers to his own scholarly works, where he proposes by the way alternative conception evolution of universe.

Культура, представляя собой систематически воспроизводимую форму отношения человека и мира, делает их предметными. Поскольку человек ‐ захваченное миром, желающее существо, постольку и энергия (деятельная способность) его желания также предметна. Предметность иэнергийность бытия человека в их взаимодействии определяют качество его персональной идентичности. Четыре слоя предметного бытия человека задают соответствующее строение его персональной идентичности.

The idea of evolution introducing a temporal parameter in the characteristics of the objects of nearly all the branches of the contemporary scientific researches and by this way involving them in a historical movement is confronted with a necessity of the correct definition of the thing submitted to evolutionary process combining substantial and dynamical aspects. In the searches of a solution of this problem one can not count on the history of society, all the more so as in this domain the problem of characteristic of its object is of the same acuteness as in the others domains. In fact, we are facing now a sort of crisis of the idea of the historicism reduced finally to the crisis of the thingness (M. Heidegger), and its expression is quite identical both in the natural and the social sciences. Difficulties of the more general order which are at the basis of that crisis can be described as the difficulties of a conceptualization of the totality and the movement. On the most general level they are presented as two kinds of metaphysics – the metaphysics of substance and the metaphysics of becoming (A.N. Whitehead). G.W.F. Hegel can be mentioned as one who indicated the general way to eliminate (sublate) the difficulties: the forming the concepts capable to support the contradictions, to sublate (aufheben) the antinomies. In the evolutionary biology this kind of solution is given by the notion of species enriched by the results of the genetics (Chetverikov S.S.), in social sciences - by the socio-economical formation (K. Marx).

Noting that among the changes wrought by globalization is a constantly accelerated influx of new knowledge and information. The majority of this information remains poorly analyzed, is not clearly understood, and is often unused. The author believes that, apparently, mankind is entering a new epoch of inevitability ofthinking by essences, instead of particulars, i.e. to an epoch of ontological thinking. In work, proceeding from a possibility of synthetic judgements a priori, the author considers ethnocultural contradictions with the help of a technique of ontological knowledge, i.e. aprioristic synthesis. Ethnocultural relations are considered by the author as a component of the general global process of various mutual relations in their historical development. Using a method of ontologic synthesis, the author synthesizes three essences: ● morals, as essence of accumulation of experience; ● the natural right, as essence of comprehension of experience; ● the legal right, as essence of application of experience. Morals is only the precondition for the growth of human mentality; firstly, from morals up to the natural right, and then to constitutional, legal and other laws. Interethnic contradictions arise not on the basis of ethnocultural, religious and confessional distinctions, but on absence of a legislative foundation for harmonization of interstate and international life. With a view of sustainable development, the main strategic priorities of modern activities should be the development of scientifically proved laws and the effective monitoring system of their performance.

Доклад посвящен проблеме формирования и проявления этнической и национальной идентичности в условиях усиливающейся массовой миграции в современном мире. Отмечается, что идентичность не только мигрантов, но и коренного населения формируется в результате наложения разнообразных культурных влияний, зачастую не совпадающих друг с другом. В зависимости от того, какие культуры воздействуют на человека, и как их воспринимает индивид, складываются разные формы идентичности: бикультурная, «разбитая», маргинальная. Особое психологическое состояние современной личности – кризис идентичностей. Автор различает понятия «этническая» и «национальная»идентичность, имея в виду идентичности двух общностей разного порядка. Этническая идентичность практически не подвержена изменениям, так как коренится в глубинных структурах психики, хотя и приобретается в результате социализации личности. Национальная идентичность связана сотождествлением с нацией – этатистским образованием, состоящим, как правило, из множества этносов. Она также достаточно устойчива, но при определенных условиях может измениться. Вывод автора: некоторые формы идентичности личности эпохи глобализации обладают определеннойгибкостью, подвижностью и изменчивостью.

The subject of author’s reflection is transformation of metaphysics in creativity of I. Kant and an opportunity of faith on the basis of new existential ontology. It begins from opportunity developing of new metaphysics in the works of Kant and then – Heidegger. There is a problem in understanding of metaphysics inKant’s art. From author’s point of view Kant tried to create a new type of ontology as a real metaphysics that doesn’t destroy the faith if one understands it non-metaphysically. Even more – Kant’s and Heidegger’s new ontology can produce and have already produced a new type of faith understanding. This transcendental and aprioristic faith is the inner essence of different faiths, which objected in religions. Nowadays this faith must be opened and rethought,because it can helps to solve global spiritual problems of mankind. Only real (ontological) and humanistic knowledge can spiritually unite persons and peoples.

One of most vivid examples of deep penetration of the Koran in Sufi consciousness which result became original mystical language is The Book of Spiritual Stayings of Muhammad al-Niffari (d. 977), an obscure figure in the history of Islamic Mysticism. As the main intermediaries-obstacles between the God and the person аl-Niffari considers three stages: 1) letter (harf), or Koran, 2) knowledge (ilm), 3) gnosis (ma’rifah). All three, in opinion al-Niffari, represent the veils hiding the God from Sufi. The language of this Book is paradoxical and such paradoxicality shows the abnormal condition of Sufi consciousness and impossibility of expressing his mutual relation with God. Al-Niffari tries to demonstrate that any attempt of verbal expression of Supreme Essence is doomed to failure. The mostcharacteristic of Niffari’s doctrines is the doctrine of waqfah. Waqfah is regarded as the spirit of ma’rifah: whereas ma’rifah sees God and itself also, waqfah sees only God and it is God’s presence. Ma’rifah is the limit of the utterable, but waqfah is beyond the utterable. The Book of Spiritual Stayings may be regarded as an unique interpretation experience of Koran overcoming it as obstacle on the way toward to God. Owing to it the principle of unity of Deity is preserved in its purity.

In given clause features of mentality of western and east person are considered. The author comes to opinion that there is a significant difference of outlooks of the people living in the East and the West. The author writes, that features of mentality of the West and the East were affected with features of labour activity, themaintenance of religious and philosophical forms of public consciousness. In the end of clause the author comes to conclusion, that despite of differention of mentality of the East and the West, they are necessary each other as they supplement and rich each other.

The problem of globalization is actual nowdays that it’s necessary to understand what it is for those who is engaged in this process. It is clear that for some persons globalization is a myth which makes to adopt and to develop the strategy of surviving when all the roles are distributed and there is no opportunity to get the main roles because the aim is to servive keeping available wealth or improving it a little. Globalization as utopia theory appeares at that time when a human being began to think about his place among other persons and it is connected with activity in reaching the ideal, to compromise or to oppose to those who determine ideology of the process. However understanding of globalization as ideology is the main thing but in this case it leads both to negative and positivemoments in human development. Heavy consequences are those of lost of identity and forming negative identity of whole nations. It’s the reason of appearing of irreversible consequences that is antiglobalizm in the best case and terrorism in the worst case. Globalization is eager to unite the world to keep stable unity of the world as the guarantee of the humanity saving in the whole and each person as well. So it gets into a trap of the old world arrangement according its external signs but a person and his life is out of this arrangement. That is why it is necessary to find the method which will make different the attitude to information flows and will pay attention to the problems of identity in the process of globalization.