1. Philosophy as a part of culture, having its history, also have traditions. The structure of any tradition includes four main elements: a) object of tradition – legacy, b) subject of tradition – its carrier, c) attitude to legacy, inherent in subject an induced by some values, d) function of legacy transmis-sion, performed by subject. 2. Objects of traditions in philosophy are: sets of problems and questions, sets of notions and categories used to think them, interpretation of notions and categories – their changing content, relevant to philosophy ‘list’ of activities for philosophers together with norms and patterns to perform them, and etc. Subjects of traditions are groups of people, who keep and transmit the above mentioned objects. 3. Values connect philosophy with cultural surroundings. They stay beyond traditions, but they are the key factor of influence at the latter. Values drive the interests of philosophers, attracting to an object of tradition or repudiating it. Subject of tradition relates values with some legacy in philosophy, that can be valued, devalued or re-valued. If tradition carrier is unaware of values that impel him to keep legacy, then we deal with unreflective irrational tradition. This kind of tradition play stabilizing role in philosophy, providing succession. Some part of reflective (realizing values) traditions do the same. The rest of them are transforming traditions, because their subject devalues this legacy and values (revalues) some other. Transforming traditions bring philosophy changes. Their time comes when society suffers a shift or replacement of values – during reformations and revolutions.

Философия ХХI века в новых сложных условиях глобализирующегося мира уже констатировала наметившиеся интер- и кросскультурные тенденции в своем развитии. Суть в том, что как в западной, так в восточной философских традициях, являющихся основаниями соответствующих культур и цивилизаций, а, значит, и соответствующих систем ценностей, типов мировоззрения, существует сложившееся тысячелетия назад концептуальное ядро, имеющее общий универсальный характер. С другой стороны, в жизни как Востока, так и Запада, в социально-культурной и политической практиках существуют и возникают острые проблемы, указывающие на внутренние противоречия, несовершенства и необходимость изменений и нового современного содержания каждой системы ценностей как Востока, так и Запада. Современная философия, философская компаративистика и социальная философия, вычленяя то общее, что имеется в духовных истоках разных культур и цивилизаций, и то частное, что и сегодня для них принципиально ценно, приоткрывает пути от конфликта к взаимопониманию, конструктивному диалогу, а в будущем и к гармоничному взаимодействию.

Воспроизведение человеческого достоинства является основополагающим условием и целью педагогической практики, рассматривается как идеализированная норма учительства. В статье реализуется нормативный подход, предложенный автором к исследованию и интерпретации феномена учительства и его воспроизводства в культуре. Учительство определяется как воспроизводство целостности ценностей знания и личности в другом. Как единицы нормативного анализа выделяются нормы идеальные и реальные, которые делятся на авторитетные, актуальные и предвосхищаемые. Описаны основные идеализированные нормы учительства: воспроизводство человеческого достоинства и воспроизводство жизни в учении. Описан ряд основных особенностей воспроизводства идеальных норм в нормах авторитетных, актуальных и предвосхищаемых.

We discuss the place and role of political philosophy in the development of political sphere and the detection of points of interaction between analytical knowledge and political practice. This discussion is important because of the widespread growth of conflicts in the world, the increase of protests and the expansion of the ranks of opposition against authorities. All this demonstrates a conflict between values and the society, lack of correlation between different views on the definition of objectives as basis for political action and achievement of goals as universal policy capacity. In the absence of universal tools for determining the nature of the political mechanism and the use of the results as political argumentation, it seems necessary to search for channels of communicating expertise, possibilities of scientific examination of the political process, as well as the mechanism of legitimization of the agreements reached by the political theory and practice.

In this paper, we examine ways out of the global socio-economic crisis in order to achieve sustainable social development. The growth of the index of human development, including the freedom of choice of lifestyle, is considered to be a necessary condition for social progress. We study the contribution of international organizations in overcoming social inequalities inside the states and between the states. We investigate the financial possibilities of solving social and political problems. It is necessary to modernize the international financial architecture: a fair solution of the problem of the offshores. Offshore banks and offshore companies up to date enjoyed significant benefits and a more facilitated tax regime; now they can and must reimburse to the society the benefits granted to them by paying full taxes. This is a realistic way to reduce social inequalities, expand human freedom of choice and get out of the global crisis. In assessing the socio-economic role of the offshore companies, the views of politicians and experts worldwide seem to converge. The reform of international organizations – the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank – which was initiated in the end of the 2010s, can serve as a model for the modernization of offshore jurisdictions in the interest of creating fairer social and political relations; this will provide stability to the system, which has as its center the human interest.

The traditional types of political theories, in their absolute form, lead to the reduction of human measure of politics, serving thus as a ground to ideologically totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. That is why the problem of the humanistic content of political ideology should be resolved in the context of analysis of complicated interrelations and inversions of the political discourse of the above paradigms. Politics should be defined as a way of collective self-determination of people in the process of their free interaction that is neither directed, nor controlled by any higher instance, which has the privilege of political domination. In this case, humanistic world outlook and political ideology are no more mutually exclusive, because humanistic values are direcctly and immediately involved in the execution of political functions.

The author introduces the concepts “cosmoenvironment” and “geocosmopolitics” to describe the current stage of development of the society. He summarizes the object and subject-matter of geocosmopolitics.The object of politics is not just territories, as it is commonly considered, but other spatial forms, including outer space. We observe today a stiff competition for resources of outer space. This shows that cosmoenvironment became object of policy. Space environment is part of the natural environment outside our planet, which, on the one hand, is a determining condition of human activities, and, on the other hand, mediates human society with the infinite Universe. The era of geocosmopolitics has started when the cosmoenvironment was included into the sphere of political interests of the world’s major powers. Space exploration and exploitation caused much of the global nature of the current stage of geopolitics, namely geocosmopolitics. In my view, geocosmopolitics can be defined substantively as the relationship between geopolitical forces (states, supranational organizations) in terms of the solution of regional and country-specific, global and space problems.

Данный доклад посвящен проблематике прав женщин и меньшинств в представлении так называемых левых политических сил – партий и движений коммунистической, социалистической и социал-демократической направленности в современной России. В докладе приведен краткий исторический экскурс, касающийся эволюции взглядов на указанную проблему в европейском политическом контексте, и сделан акцент на её состоянии в политической теории и практике современных российских левых. Нами сделан вывод, что на сегодняшний день можно говорить о формировании в России двух практически не пересекающихся левых дискурсов: официозного, по большей части игнорирующего проблему дискриминации женщин и меньшинств; и своеобразных «новых левых», которые одним из направлений своей деятельности выбрали противодействие умолчанию или открытой дискриминационной риторике и практике, которые присущи современной российской власти, консервативной par excellence.

The most important causes of radicalisation of the political interactions are the alienation of power and political influence, the marginalization of the political subjects, aggravation of the problems of the legitimacy of power through the use of inadequate mechanisms of legitimisation, a certain irrationalization of policy. A significant part of people is eliminated from the political processes. Political parties do not give possibilities to influence the policy to any potential out-of-power political entities and they do not serve as the means of involvement into the politics of the future. The authority does not often fulfill political functions of the power within the society. It does not guide significant for the development social processes and in this sense it appears to be marginal as well as the political parties. The policy is deprived of the essence which is related to the conditions and forms of reproduction and development of the society and human being. The problem of legitimacy is often being solved inadequately when legitimation is based on a traditional or charismatic type. For the rationalization of the policy the following is required: social dereification, restructuring of the society and of the political field itself. New groups of interests, directions and ways of realization of these interests and possibilities of its conformance in management and the associated social design should be identified and completed with regard to social development. In the communication with regard to such projecting, in the process of specification of such projects «places» and «roles» in the social and political space can be created.

The personality’s health is the complex spiritual-psychological phenomenon, which must be studied in the context of the spiritual-moral formation of man, his self-realization, development of capability for adaptation and psychophysical functioning. The investigation of a personality’s health was accomplished from the views of Christian anthropology. The concepts of health, its value for man, are connected to the understanding of sense and purposes of human life – the rescuing of soul and spiritual personality’s transformation. In this tradition, the concept of health indicates, first of all, spiritual health. Holiness is its ideal state. Health - this is chastity - is the highest state of moral perfection. Health can also indicate the absence of spiritual, mental and physical illnesses. These ideas led to the understanding of a personality’s health as a multilevel formation, which includes the unity of man’s psychophysical, psychological and spiritual-moral characteristics. The physical and mental health, necessary for man’s vitality - and on the apex, spiritual- psychological health is located on the basis of this system. The highest spiritual level of the personality’s health exerts the changing influence on the underlying levels connected with the adaptation, self-realization and the personality’s growth. Health is the integrative characteristic of personality, which includes the different spheres of its individual existence.

The paper focuses on the video game Zuma released in 2003 by PopCap Games. A frog acts as the one and only avatar of the player in this game. Frog operates in several sequentially changing each other milieus: underground water, clinker and finally outer space. I will discuss how the game scenario elaborates ancient ideas about basic elements, which were supposed to be the founding principles of all natural things. Furthermore the frog’s trip reminds representations of a vertical hierarchically arranged world-order. I claim that concerning this point, the analysed game reveals an interesting combination of pagan and Christian theology and stands for the contemporary allegory of the soul salvation. In my paper, I am going to foster the notion of instrumental technology embedded in pocket devices. Instrumentalised religion proves to be yet another instance of the logic of capitalist appropriation of different cultural phenomena.

The paper studies the philosophy of Russian diaspora of the twentieth century. We consider the works, which attempt to interpret the foundations and cultural unity of the European Christian civilization. V.V. Zenkovsky (1881-1962) in an untitled manuscript, written between 1920 and 1925, and published in 2011, analyses the history of European civilization, and searches for ways out of the large-scale European crisis. Zenkovsky assumed that it is possible to overcome the crisis through the construction of a harmonious, integral culture. Thus, he tried to develop systematically the fundamental principles of Christian civilization. We compare Zenkovsky’s manuscript with the work of other thinkers of Russian diaspora devoted to the principles of Christian civilization. Semyon L. Frank (1877-1950) in his book The Spiritual Foundations of Society (1930) and Ivan A. Ilyin (1883-1954) in his Foundations of Christian Culture (1937) examine the problems of Christian civilization in the context of social philosophy and philosophy of culture. The Russian philosophers try to interpret the spiritual crisis of European civilization and find ways to overcome its contradictions. Their ideas remain relevant and can still stimulate the philosophical discussions of our time.

At the turn of the 20th-21st centuries, we observe a communitarian turn in the political and legal consciousness both in Western society and in Russia. From methodological point of view, this turn is characterized as postmodern discourse of philosophy of law. Communitarianism is a kind of expression of justice and the rise of the question not only of freedom, but also of the welfare. The spread of communitarian discourse in Russia is particularly noticeable. Communitarian discourse is explicit in the political culture of traditional type, represented in the Russian philosophical and legal thought. Despite the difference in the historical paths (including historical time) between Russia and Europe, there appear general laws of development of the philosophical and legal thought.

Grigory Skovoroda (1722–1794) occupies a totally special place in Russian cultural consciousness. Realizing its own specifics, Russian philosophy of XIX-XX centuries was searching for its fundamentals, origin, source, and «seed». Such origin for Russian philosophical consciousness became the personality of wandering thinker Grigory Skovoroda, whose outstanding qualities, like Socrates, were organic unity of inquiry and life. Many generations of Russian intellectuals, from Mikhail Kovalinsky to Alexey Losev, saw this Ukrainian poet, pedagogue and religious thinker as a «first Russian philosopher», forerunner of original Russian philosophy; philosophy, which takes the concepts of «integrity», reconciliation of philosophical theory and practice of life as priority.

The problem of philosophical understanding of the status of society and the role of philosophy and intellectuals in it in the era of the empires’ collapses arose with special acuteness. The most vivid interpretations, not having its continuation, criticized by its contemporaries, recur in the history of the similar socio-political situation, having reproduced not only the model of philosophical argumentation, but also of its own social helplessness. An example in the history of philosophy can be Vekhi (“Landmarks” or “Signposts”) – Russian intellectual movement organized around the collection of seven essays published in 1909 and the so-called “new philosophy” in France and repeating them respectively in the new Russia, and now – in France, after the elections of 2012.

Le temps de «la Renaissance russe religieuse» (F. F. Zelinsky) ressemble à l’époque de l’Antiquit tardive marquee par le syncrétisme alexandrin, ou le savoir philosophiques se melangeait avec des diverses pratiques religieuses et mystiques. Après Vladimir Soloviev la culture russe est marquée par le rejaillissement de l’intérêt vers au gnosticisme des premiers siècles du christianisme et la gnose néo-européenne, donc les éléments sont largement intégrés aux systèmes philosophiques (surtout du caractère non particulièrement académique – N. Berdyaev, S. Boulgakov, L. Karsavin, V. Mouraviev etc.), ainsi que sont utilisés par des poètes (A. Blok, A. Belyj, M. Kouzmin, V. Bryussov, M. Voloshin etc.). C’est non seulement la doctrine de la chute du Plérome du Principe féminin (Sofia), mais aussi l’intérêt vers des formes de la connaissance non-rationelles, l’idéalisme (l’ idée est comprise comme le principe vivant qui se deploye dans la pensée et dans l’ art), la doctrine de l’ascension, l’apophase, l’élitisme. Le gnosticisme (donc la patrie est Alexandrie) est perçu dans la pensee russe comme la partie de l’héritage antique, contrairement à ce que Plotin reprochait aux gnostiques l’audace imprudente et opposait leur philosophie a la sienne. H. Jonas marquait la ressemblance de la conception du monde gnostique et la philosophie de l’existentialisme avec sa sensation de l’abandon de la personne au monde et son ahgoisse de l’être. Probablement, la complexité accroissante et l’imprévisibilité du monde rend le gnosticisme antique populaire à l’époque des guerres et les révolutions. On ne peut pas retrancher cependant du compte l’inspiration intellectuelle de la gnose, acquise lors de l’histoire européenne. La gnose attire des philosophes et des poètes par le potentiеl heuristique de mythe et de la métaphore.

In conditions of crisis of public life, systems of extra confessional mysticism esoterics, eschatological motives receive wide distribution in para-intellectual circles. But even in philosophy mystical motives are inherent even in especially rational directions. All mystical doctrines express themselves not so much in a language of concepts, as in a language of symbols. The mysticism subject within Russian Baden neo-Kantianism is represented as quite pertinent if we are to take into consideration that the ‘istoriosofiya’ differs from history philosophy in that it applies to secret knowledge of history, mysticism being in its plan, and demands, along with learning, experience of history as the personal spiritual destiny. The Russian symbolism inherited the main western, line however, having corrected it a little. Symbolism, as the world outlook direction, as reaction to materialism, positivism and realism in the European culture, covered the widest circles of intellectual elite of society. Russian neo-kantianist Feodor Stepun considers mysticism as the fundamental moment of Russian outlook. Sergey Gessen supports this point of view and argues that mysticism – the type of metaphysics arising on border, philosophy separating area and culture from the sphere of irrational experience.

The concept of the individual, as a rule, is examined in connection with the liberal tradition of Russian philosophy. In the conservative model it is rarely studied and frequently even the very presence of a study about the personality is denied, since attention is entirely accentuated on society. But for the Russian conservatives of the end of XIX and the beginning of XX centuries, the search for an alternative to the propagation of the mass person, which is turned havoc against the background of the modernization of Russian culture becomes urgent. To chief ideologist of Russian conservatism K.P. Pobedonostsev, the democratization of the public and cultural sphere is seen by way of the degradation of elite, and people culture. He attempted to connect the traditions of Russian orthodoxy with the philosophical searches of the slavophiles of the middle XIX of century, the romantic idealization of medieval culture and the criticism of bourgeois society. It is one of the first, who critically comprehended action on the personality of mass culture. Ideal “organic” society is based on the principles of hierarchical quality and paternalism. The turn of K.P. Pobedonostsev to “the soil”, as a unique orthodox-monarchist “people’s movement”, is consonant with views F.M. Dostoyevsky and N.Y. Danilevskiy, and the ideas of the leading part of cultural elite, unexpectedly draw together with it, also, N. A. Berdyaev.

Стремление к осмыслению космоса и человека в нем – важный элемент философских исканий в разные исторические эпохи, начиная со времен Древнего Востока и Запада до наших дней. Актуальной здесь остается проблема выявления принципа, лежащего в Основании Бытия, открывающего возможность системно-целостного видения мира как единой самоорганизующейся целостности, а также места и значения человека в ней. С точки зрения осмысления подобного принципа космического мышления и разработки основанной на нем исследовательской методологии, на наш взгляд, представляет значительный интерес целостный подход, лежащий в основе самобытной русской философии. Имея неразрывную связь с мировой философской мыслью, но, исторически произрастая на почве русской духовной культуры, он нашел свое наиболее последовательное и логичное выражение в Учении Живой Этики. Его особенностью является то, что он служит не только формированию синтетического способа осмысления мира, но, устремляя человека к духовному преображению, способствует гармоничному образу жизни и дальнейшей космической эволюции. Для теоретической и практической реализации этой методологии важно осмысление алгоритма динамики проявленного Бытия, проистекающего из принципа Триипостасности Основ Абсолюта.

In the given article we consider peculiarities of historical cognition under the conditions of globalization, of which one of the most important characteristics is a forceful interpretation of history. Here, we prove that it is performed in the interest of the subjects of globalization, i.e. leading western countries on the account of the countries of «the Second and the Third World», and that is why the ideologists of globalization are not interested in objective study of the historical Past. They use history in its euro-centric variant, in which basis there are mondialistic tendencies, justifying aggressive ambitions of globalization initiators, and the result of it becomes the menace that separate societies can lose their socio-cultural essences. In the given situation, consideration of axiological peculiarities of Russia becomes of special importance and substantiates its place in the globalized world society upon the basis of its own historical traditions.